(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Minutes"

DOCUMENTS DEPARTMt 



IN I 



5/S 



m 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

REFERENCE 
BOOK 

Not to be taken from the Library 



JUL -3 2000 



SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY 



3 1223 05465 5544 




/SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



? 



REGULAR MEETING 

4:00 P.M.sJAN UARY 14, 19 97^) 
FERRY BUILDING, SUITE3100 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 



2 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
JAN 9 1997 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



AGENDA 

1. ROLL CALL 
W*?7 2 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES - December 20, 1996 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Election of Port Commission Officers 

B. Executive Director's Report 

4. LEGISLATIVE 

) 5. TENANT & MARITIME SERVICES 

A. Approval of month-to-month lease with National Maritime Museum Association at 
Pier 45 for USS Pampanito. (Resolution No. 97-02) 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

A. Authorization to advertise for competitive bids on Construction Contract No. 2622, 
"Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit," for earthquake damage repairs. (Resolution No. 
97-03) 

B. Approval to declare a utility underground district along Terry A. Francois Boulevard 
from 800 feet south of the southerly intersection of Mission Rock and Terry A. 
Francois Boulevard to north of the southerly intersection of China Basin Street and 
Terry A. Francois Boulevard. (Resolution No. 97-04) 

C. Authorization to issue a Request for Proposals for soil and groundwater 
characterization and management services. (Resolution No. 97-05) 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. Approval of Amendment to Landing Rights License for Common Carrier Ferry 
Service Landing Slot(s) to provide rental credits for modifications to ramping system 
at Pier Vi. (Resolution No. 97-06) 



A011497.igq 



-1- 



3 1223 05465 5544 



) 



8. ADMINISTRATION 

9. MARKETING 

10. CONSENT CALENDAR 

11. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

12. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT 

1) Confirmation of Appointment of Director of Tenant Services 

2) Confirmation of Appointment of Director of Planning & Development 

An executive session to discuss this matter is specifically authorized under 
California Government Code Section 54957. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING ANTICIPATED 
LITIGATION MATTER: 

1) Discuss significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 (1 case). 

D. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 
Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 

13. ADJOURNMENT 

Public comment is permitted on any matter within Port jurisdiction, and is not limited to agenda 
items. Public comment on non-agenda items may be raised during New Business/Public 
Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the Commission Secretary . 

A0U497, 8q -2- 2 4: 

10 7 SFP1 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



January 2, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 41 5 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee, Vice President 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James R. Herman 
Hon. Denise McCarthy 

Douglas F. Wong /Jill 
Executive Director 



SUBJECT: Approval of a month-to-month lease with National Maritime Museum Association 
at Pier 45 for USS Pampanito. 

DIRECTORS RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE LEASE 



Background 

Since June 15, 1981, the National Maritime Museum Association (the "Association") has leased 
apron and berthing space adjacent to Shed A at Pier 45 for the display of the USS Pampanito under 
Port License to Use Space Non-Exclusive No. 10486. Pursuant to this license, the Association 
has been paying a monthly minimum fee of $540.00 per month (or $.05 per square foot of apron 
space), versus a percentage fee based upon 6% of gross receipts. During Fiscal Year 1995/96, 
the Association generated sales of $1,007,661.00 at Pier 45 and paid total fees (minimum plus 
percentage fees) to the Port of $60,463.00, or an average of $5,038.58 per month. Prior to the 
1989 earthquake, the Association also leased adjacent storage space in Shed A, but had to vacate 
the space after the earthquake. As a result, the Association had to close its retail shop on the 
apron, move some of its support facilities into this retail shop and onto the apron, and remove the 
remaining support facilities from Pier 45 . 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 5A 



Agenda Item No. 5A 
January 2, 1997 
Page 2 



Port staff has now negotiated the following two leases with the Association for Pier 45: 

1. Lease No. 12242 is for approximately 2,024 sq. ft. of shed space inside of Shed A at Pier 
45 for office, storage, and maintenance uses directly related to the operation of the USS 
Pampanito, with a monthly base rent of $.45 per square foot. This use and rent fall within 
the leasing parameters preapproved by the Port Commission, and this lease therefore does 
not require specific approval by the Port Commission. 

2. Lease No. 12301 is for apron and water space adjacent to Shed A at Pier 45 for berthing 
the USS Pampanito, with a monthly base rent of $.15 per square foot, which also falls 
within the leasing parameters preapproved by the Port Commission. However, the uses 
allowed under this lease do not directly fall within the leasing parameters and therefore 
specific approval is required from the Port Commission. 

Proposed Lease No. 12301 

1. Premises : 15,921 sq. ft. of apron space and 8,736 sq. ft. of water space located adjacent 
to Shed A at Pier 45 for the USS Pampanito, as shown on the attached site plan. 

2. Term : Month-to-month. 

3. Use : Non-exclusive use of the apron as access and support facilities for the USS 
Pampanito, and exclusive use of the berth depicted on the site plan for berthing of the USS 
Pampanito, but no other vessel. The Association may use a 207 sq. ft. gift shop located 
on the apron for the sale of gift items related to, and in support of, maritime history, the 
USS Pampanito, the San Francisco National Maritime Park, and the Association. The 
Association may use an 84 sq. ft. ticket booth located on the apron for the sale of tickets 
to board and tour the USS Pampanito. The Association may use the apron to load and 
unload materials and for maintenance vehicles directly involved in the above referenced 
permitted uses. Except for such loading and unloading of materials and maintenance, the 
Association shall not use the apron at any time for parking vehicles. Any other use of the 
apron shall require the written approval of the Port. 

The Association also agrees to allow access to the apron portion of the Premises by the 
public during normal business hours, as defined in the lease or as altered with prior written 
approval of the Port, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Moreover, the 
Association agrees, at the request of the Port, to allow access to both the apron portion of 
the Premises and the balance of the apron north of the Premises during other than normal 
business hours. 



Agenda Item No. 5A 
January 2, 1997 
Page 3 



4. Base Rent : $2,400.00 per month, which equals $. 15 per square foot of the apron space. 
This monthly rental also approximates the percentage rental during the Association's 
slowest sales months of the year. 

5. Percentage Rent : Percentage rent shall be offset by base rent paid and shall be calculated 
and paid monthly by applying the percentage rates indicated below to the gross receipts of 
the indicated types of sales: 

a. Ticket sales - 6%. 

b. Gift shop sales -9%. 

The Association shall pay percentage rent for any period that the USS Pampanito is not 
berthed at the premises equivalent to the percentage rent due the Port for the same period 
during the prior calendar year. The USS Pampanito may leave the Premises for up to two 
months per year for dry docking or other purposes without prior Port approval. If the USS 
Pampanito will be gone from the Premises for more than two months, then it shall obtain 
the Port's prior approval, which will not be unreasonably withheld. 

6. Maintenance : The Association shall be responsible for all maintenance and repairs to the 
Premises, except for the pier substructure (consisting of wooden piles and pile caps). The 
Association shall be responsible for maintenance and repairs to the wooden stringers, 
decks, fenders and other berthing improvements, and for repairs to the pier substructure 
resulting from its negligence or intentional acts or omissions. 



Prepared by: Kirk W. Bennett, Sr. Property Manager, 
Northern Waterfront/Fisherman's Wharf 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\NATMARMU.KBUanuary 2, 1997 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-02 



WHEREAS, 



Charter Section B3.581 empowers the Port Commission with the power and 
duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and control the 
Port area of San Francisco; and 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



RESOLVED, 



under Charter Section B3. 58 1(g) leases granted or made by the Port 
Commission shall be administered exclusively by the operating forces of the 
Port Commission; and 

Port Commission approval is being sought for Lease No. 12301 with the 
National Maritime Museum Association, the terms of which are set forth 
in the Memorandum of Agenda Item 5A at the Port Commission meeting 
on January 14, 1997; now therefore, be it 

that the Port Commission hereby approves Lease No. 12301, which 
incorporates the business terms set forth in the Memorandum for Agenda 
Item 5A of the Port Commission Meeting on January 14, 1997, and that the 
Executive Director, or his designee, is hereby authorized to execute Lease 
No. 12301 on behalf of the Port in such final form as is substantially in the 
form on file with the Secretary of the Port Commission for said Agenda 
item and in such final form as is approved by the City Attorney. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its meeting 
of January 14, 1997. 



Secretary 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\NATMARMU.KB\ibn\January 2, 1997 



) 



o 
m 

cr 
< 

I 



< 



< 

cr 
u 

X 



oft 



u. 

«xom 
in 1 



u. 

2 .03 

m 2 



I 3 

cu 
Ij 



2 JS80£fr 
n 



m< 






pa 

CO 



Of 
Ld 



o 

Q 
Ld 
X 
CO 




5 

5 & 



O 
O 
O 

I 
O 

I 

o 



— H- 

< Ul 
I— UJ 

< (/) 

2 



o 
CO 

CO 



o 
o 

I— 
q: 
o 

Q. 

o 
o 

CO 

o 
z 
< 

cr 



< 

CO 



o 
o 

o 

cr 



< 



o 
a. 



t- CM 

O -<* 

CM CM 

T T 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMORANDUM 



January 8, 1997 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee, Vice President 
Hon. James Herman 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. Denise McCarthy 

Douglas F. Wong #cP 
Executive Director 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 41 5 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



SUBJECT: Authorization to advertise for competitive bids for the "Pier 48 Bulkhead 
Seismic Retrofit Project," Construction Contract No. 2622 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: THAT THE COMMISSION AUTHORIZE STAFF 
TO ADVERTISE FOR COMPETITIVE BIDS FOR THE "PIER 48 BULKHEAD SEISMIC 
RETROFIT PROJECT," CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT NO. 2622, IN ACCORDANCE 
WITH THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION 

The Pier 48 bulkhead buildings incurred structural damage during the 1989 Loma Prieta 
Earthquake. On July 19, 1995 per Resolution No. 95-63, the Port Commission authorized GKO 
Engineering Co. to analyze the damage, determine the most cost effective method of repair, and. 
develop contract documents (specifications) for the seismic repair. GKO has completed the 
contract documents and Port Staff has assembled the contract package for competitive bid. 

The retrofit includes the following work: driving new steel piles to support the concrete 
bulkhead exterior walls, pouring new concrete grade beams and structural slabs, jacking-up the 
existing exterior concrete walls, repairing the cracks in the existing exterior concrete walls, 
installing new steel braced frames and plywood roof diaphragm, and abating hazardous 
materials. 

The estimated cost of the construction project is $1,550,000. It is anticipated that FEMA/OES 
will fund the entire cost of the seismic retrofit. 



Prepared by Cliff Jarrard, Chief Harbor Engineer 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM 6A 



I:\wp51\agd-p48.jr 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 97-03 



WHEREAS, Pier 48 bulkhead incurred structural damage during the 1989 Loma 
Prieta Earthquake; and 

WHEREAS, the Port Commission previously authorized GKO Engineering Co. to 
analyze the damage, develop the most cost effective method of repair 
and prepare contract documents for the seismic repair; and 

WHEREAS, GKO has completed the contract documents and the Port has assembled the 
contract package for competitive bid; and 

WHEREAS, it is anticipated that FEMA/OES will fund the entire cost of the seismic 
retrofit; now therefore be it 

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby authorizes staff to advertise 
for competitive bids for Construction Contract No. 2622 "Pier 48 Bulkhead 
Seismic Retrofit Project," at an estimated cost of $1,550,000. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of January 14, 1997. 



Secretary 



I:\wp51\agd-p48.jr 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



January 8, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 41 5 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 41 5 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee, Vice President 
Hon. James Herman 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. Denise McCarthy 

Douglas F. Wong^$J 
Executive Director 



SUBJECT: Approval to declare a utility underground district along Terry A. Francois Blvd. 
starting 800 feet south of the southerly intersection of Mission Rock and Terry 
A. Francois Blvd. and continuing north to the southerly intersection of China 
Basin Street and Terry A. Francois Blvd. 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PROCEED WITH 
LEGISLATION TO DECLARE A UTILITY UNDERGROUND DISTRICT ALONG 
TERRY FRANCOIS BOULEVARD AS SPECIFIED 

Since the Commission approved the conceptual design of the Pier 52 project on October 22, 
1996, the Port consultant - ARCUS Architecture and Planning - has proceeded to develop 
construction documents for this project. The elements of this project include: 



a double lane boat launch ramp with boarding floats; 
an accessible gangway with guest dock; 
a cafe/bait and tackle shop with an outdoor dining deck; 
public access, landscaping and roadway improvements; and 
a 20 vehicle/trailer parking lot. 



The vehicle/trailer parking lot is planned for the west side of Terry A. Francois Blvd where there 
are existing overhead utility lines. In order to design the proposed parking lot in accordance 
with Cal Boating requirements, it is necessary to reroute the overhead power lines that currently 
run along the west side of Terry Francois Blvd. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 6B 



I:\wp51\agd-p52u.cj2 



PORT COMMISSION 
Page 2 



PG&E estimated the cost to reroute the overhead power lines to the back of the proposed 
parking lot at approximately $150,000. As an alternative, PG&E estimated the cost to locate 
these lines underground directly in front of the parking lot at approximately $375,000. Neither 
of these alternatives can be accommodated by the current Pier 52 construction budget. 

The most economical way to finance the utility relocation is to have the area declared an 
Underground District. An Underground District is defined as a minimum of 600 feet of 
overhead electrical line or an entire block length of electrical overhead power lines to be 
removed and rerouted underground for City and County Public Access/Use Projects. This is the 
term the Board of Supervisors uses when voting on approving the relocating of overhead power 
lines underground. Both Board and Commission approval is necessary for PG&E to reroute 
electrical lines underground at no cost to the Port. Under the City's agreement with PG&E, the 
Port must provide street lights where the overhead poles are removed, and pay for underground 
electrical supply to tenants. Staff has worked with PG&E and the San Francisco Department 
of Public Works ("DPW") to facilitate relocating these utilities underground. With Commission 
approval, staff will request the San Francisco Board of Supervisors to declare this area an 
Underground District. 

The Port will incur the cost of providing underground power service for those tenants that are 
currently connected to the overhead power lines. In addition, the Port must provide new 
overhead street lights at 100 foot intervals to replace the existing lights which are attached to 
the utility poles. The new services and lights will cost the Port $35,000 for the poles directly 
in front of the proposed Pier 52 parking lot. These funds are in the current Pier 52 budget. 
However, staff recommends that the Underground District be extended to the corner of Terry 
A. Francois Blvd. and China Basin Street so that when future funds become available, utilities 
in this additional area can be relocated underground. Please see attached plan. The current 
estimated cost for the Port to provide private services and street lights in this extended area is 
an additional $85,000. 

Staff seeks the Commission's approval to declare the portion along Terry A. Francois Blvd. an 
Underground District in order for the Board of Supervisors to vote for approval. 



Prepared by: Cliff Jarrard, Chief Harbor Engineer 



I:\wp51\agd-p52u.cj2 






PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-04 



WHEREAS, the Commission previously approved the conceptual design of Pier 52 which 
includes a vehicle/trailer parking lot; and 

WHEREAS, in order to design the proposed parking lot in accordance with Cal Boating 

requirements, it is necessary to reroute the overhead power lines that currently 
run along the west side of Terry Francois Boulevard; and 

WHEREAS, by having the San Francisco Board of Supervisors declare this area an 
Underground District the overhead power lines will be converted to 
underground service at no cost to the Port; and 

WHEREAS, the Port will however incur the cost of providing underground power service 
for any tenants that are currently connected to the overhead power lines; and 

WHEREAS, the Port will also have to provide new overhead street lights at 100 feet 

intervals to replace the existing lights which are attached to utility poles; and 

WHEREAS, the new services and lights will cost the Port $35,000 for undergrounding 
directly in front of the proposed Pier 52 parking lot and these funds are 
currently in the Pier 52 project budget; and 

WHEREAS, staff recommends that the Underground District be extended to the corner of 
Terry A. Francois Boulevard and China Basin Street so that when future 
funds become available, this additional area can be undergrounded by a later 
phase of work; now therefore be it 

RESOLVED, the Port Commission hereby approves the declaration of a utility 

underground district along Terry A. Francois Blvd. starting 800 feet south 
of the southerly intersection of Mission Rock and Terry A. Francois Blvd. 
and continuing north to the southerly intersection of China Basin Street and 
Terry A. Francois Blvd and further authorizes staff to present this to the 
San Francisco Board of Supervisors for action. . 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of January 14, 1997. 



Secretary 



I:\wp51\agd-p52u.cj2 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



MEMORANDUM 

January 8, 1997 




TO: 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco. CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 41 5 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



FROM: 



SUBJECT: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee, Vice President 
Hon. James Herman 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. Denise McCarthy 

Douglas F. Wong *fyj 
Executive Director 

Authorization to issue a Request for Proposals for soil and groundwater 
characterization and management services 



DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ISSUE A REQUEST 
FOR PROPOSALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION 

The Port seeks to engage an outside consultant to provide expert consulting services for soil and 
groundwater characterization and management. Soil and groundwater which may have been 
impacted by leaking underground storage tanks, and other potentially contaminated soil and 
groundwater which are encountered during Port operations and development projects must be 
characterized in order to comply with environmental and safety laws and regulations. 

SCOPE OF WORK: 

Performance of this work requires the contractor to be able to provide drilling equipment, 
laboratory analysis, and professional certifications. These tasks are beyond the resources of 
Port staff. Accordingly an outside consultant must be hired. This consultant will perform the 
following work: 

1. Investigation of and remedial action planning to address contamination at former 
underground fuel storage tank sites. 



Site investigation and remedial action planning activities will include, but may not be 
imited to the following: 

Preparation of site investigation work plans and reports. 

Subsurface investigation using conventional drilling and direct-push technologies. 

Soil and groundwater sampling and analysis. 

Data validation. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 6C 



I:\wp51\agd-soil.cj 



PORT COMMISSION 
PAGE 2 



Human health risk assessment using ASTM and/or other methods. 

Ecological risk assessment. 

Remedial action planning and evaluation. 

Regulatory agency interface. 

Negotiating UST site closure. 

2. Assessment of potential soil and groundwater contamination: and evaluation and 
implementation of appropriate remedial action or other management measures . 

This portion of the work will be requested on an as-needed basis and will include, but may 
not be limited to: 

• Preliminary site assessment, including site history 

• Preparing sampling plans, assessment reports, and site mitigation plans in accordance 
with applicable State and local standards, including the Maher Ordinance. 

• Soil and groundwater sampling and analysis. 

• Assessing potential risks, and preparing health and safety plans for workers at 
contaminated sites. 

• Developing cost estimates, and evaluating disposal options and/or other alternatives for 
management of contaminated soil and groundwater. 

The selected consultant will work under the supervision of Project Managers from the Port's 
Environmental Health and Safety or Engineering Sections. Work must be performed by 
personnel with specific professional registrations (e.g. State Registered Geologist) and 
specialized training and experience in geology, hydrogeology, and human health and ecological 
risk assessment. Based upon the consultant's investigations, the Port will be able to determine 
which former underground storage tank cases can be closed, which may require additional 
remediation, or how soil and groundwater disturbed by operations or development projects can 
be managed. Any additional remediation, if required, is outside of the scope of this 
consultant's work and would require additional services. 

The cost of the consultant services is estimated at from $200,000 to $250,000 and the funds are 
budgeted in the Port's Capital Plan. 



Prepared by: Cliff Jarrard 

Chief Harbor Engineer 



I:\wp51\agd-soil.cj 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-05 



WHEREAS, potential subsurface contamination must be evaluated in order to comply with 
Federal, State, and local laws and regulations; and 

WHEREAS, the Port needs assessment of potential soil and groundwater conditions for 
planning, budgeting, environmental and safety purposes; and 

WHEREAS, the Port does not have the required staff or equipment to complete the work in- 
house; and 

WHEREAS, to accomplish these needs, the Port must obtain outside services of an 
environmental consultant to investigate potential contamination and characterize 
soil and groundwater at former underground storage tank locations and other 
sites as-needed; and 

WHEREAS, said consultant shall possess demonstrated experience and expertise in the 
technical and regulatory issues associated with the required work, including 
specialized training, equipment, and certifications; and 

WHEREAS, the estimated cost is from $200,000 to $250,000 and these funds for this work 
are budgeted in the Capital Program; therefore be it 

RESOLVED, that the Commission hereby authorizes staff to issue a Request for Proposals for 
expert environmental consulting services for soil and groundwater 
characterization and management. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of January 14, 1997. 



Secretary 



I:\wp51\agd-soil.cj 



( 



( 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



January 14, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 41 5 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee, Vice President 
Hon. James Herman 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. Denise McCarthy 

> 'it I 
Douglas F. Wong U6' 

Executive Directof 



SUBJECT: 



Amendment to Landing Rights License For Common Carrier Ferry Service 
Landing Slot(s) to provide rental credits for modifications to ramping system at 



Pier !/ 2 



DIRECTORS RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AMENDMENT 

The City of Vallejo is currently constructing a new ferry boat which is scheduled to commence 
service to the existing Pier Vi float on April 1, 1997. The existing Pier V A ramping and fendering 
systems will not accommodate the landing of this new vessel, because of the boat's unusually 
high freeboard, which measures approximately seven (7) feet. Also, the existing ramping 
system requires passenger circulation directly on the float deck, which can be hazardous during 
inclement weather. The ramping and fendering systems need to be modified to correct these 
conditions. The retrofitted ramp will benefit not only the City of Vallejo's common carrier ferry 
service, but all common carrier ferry operators and their passengers, by eliminating passenger 
circulation on the deck of the Pier l A float. 

All common carrier ferry operators that use the Pier X A float currently pay landing fees under 
Landing Rights Licenses For Common Carrier Ferry Service Landing Slot(s) ("Landing 
Agreement") between the Port and the operators, which calls for a fee per landing per day that 
declines as the number of daily landings increases (please see Exhibit A for the current landing 
fee schedule). The landing fees are structured to generate enough revenue to the Port to pay for 
the annual maintenance and operating costs of the Pier l A float. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM 7A 



Agenda Item 7A 

Amendment to Landing Rights License 

Page Two 



For the past three years, the Port has generated an average of $1 14,000 per year in landing fees 
under the Landing Agreement for Pier Vz. (Please refer to Exhibit B for a breakdown of the 
revenues and expenses at the Pier X A float for the past three fiscal years). 

To expedite the implementation of the new work to meet the April 1, 1997 deadline, the City 
of Vallejo has expressed their willingness to fund the project and contract for the necessary 
design and construction services. The cost of designing and constructing the new ramping and 
fendering systems is estimated to be approximately $140,000. The other common carrier ferry 
service operators (Red and White, Harbor Bay Isle and the City of Alameda) would reimburse 
the City of Vallejo for specific agreed-upon amounts based upon their estimated landing 
activity. 

Under the amended Landing Agreement, the Port would suspend the regular landing fees to be 
charged each operator for common carrier ferry service until the operators have been reimbursed 
for their contribution to the project, for a total amount not-to-exceed $140,000. Based on the 
landing activity levels of the past several years, this will take approximately 15 months. The 
regular common carrier ferry service landing fees would resume once the operators have 
recaptured their costs. During the rent credit period, the Port will pay for the maintenance and 
operating costs of the Pier l A float from its operating budget. 

Prepared by: 

Paul Osmundson, Acting Director, 

Planning and Development 



I:\wp51\agd-p48.jr 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 97-06 



WHEREAS, The City of Vallejo is currently constructing a new ferry boat which is scheduled 
to commence service to the existing Pier Vi float on April 1, 1997; and 

WHEREAS, The existing Pier l A ramping and fendering systems will not accommodate the 
landing of this new vessel, and in their current condition require passenger 
circulation directly on the float deck, which can be hazardous during inclement 
weather; and 

WHEREAS, The existing ramping and fendering systems need to be modified in order to 
accommodate the new Vallejo boat and to improve passenger circulation on the 
float (the "Project"); and 

WHEREAS, To expedite the Project, the City of Vallejo has expressed their willingness to 
fund the Project and contract for the necessary design and construction services, 
with the other common carrier ferry service operators using Pier l A (Red and 
White, Harbor Bay Isle and the City of Alameda) to reimburse Vallejo for a 
share of the cost of the Project; and 

WHEREAS, The cost of designing and constructing the Project is estimated to be 
approximately $140,000; and 

WHEREAS, The Port desires to reimburse the operators for costs incurred on the project, for 
a total amount not-to-exceed $140,000, by applying rent credits to the Pier l A 
north float common carrier ferry service landing fees for actual contributions 
made by each operator to the cost of the Project; now, therefore be it 

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby authorizes the Executive 
Director or his designee to execute an amendment to the Landing Rights License 
For Common Carrier Ferry Service Landing Slot(s) in a form approved by the 
City Attorney to apply rent credits, in an amount not-to-exceed $140,000, to the 
Pier Vi north float common carrier ferry service landing fees, in order to facilitate 
the construction of the Project. 

/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of January 14, 1997. 



Secretary 



I:\wp51\agd-p48.jr 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



JANUARY 14, 1997 

MINUTES OF THE MEETING 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

HON. MICHAEL HARDEMAN, PRESIDENT 
HON. DENISE MCCARTHY, VICE PRESIDENT 
HON. FRANKIE G. LEE 
HON. PRESTON COOK 
HON. JAMES HERMAN 



DOUGLAS F. WONG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 



OCT C 8 1999 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

MINUTES OF THE MEETING 

JANUARY 14, 1997 

1. ROLL CALL 

The meeting was called to order by Commission President Michael Hardeman at 4:07 
p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Michael Hardeman, Frankie Lee, 
Preston Cook, James Herman and Denise McCarthy. 

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - December 20, 1996 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded the 

motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the minutes of the meeting 
were adopted. 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Election of Port Commission Officers 

Commissioner Lee made a motion to elect new officers of the Port Commission. 
Commissioner Cook seconded the motion. 

ACTION: Commissioner Herman nominated Commissioner Hardeman as President 
of the Commission. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. 
Commissioner Herman moved approval that the nomination be accepted 
by acclamation. Commissioner Cook seconded the motion. All of the 
Commissioners were in favor. Commissioner Hardeman was 
unanimously elected President of the Commission. 

ACTION: Commissioner Lee nominated Commissioner McCarthy as Vice 

President of the Commission. Commissioner Cook seconded the motion. 
All of the Commissioners were in favor. Commissioner McCarthy was 
unanimously elected Vice President of the Commission. 

B. Executive Director's Report 

1) Executive Director Doug Wong reported about the New Year's Eve party. 
Barring weather conditions, the event was very successful. Bill Graham Presents 
(BGP) sold 9,250 tickets, an increase from 8,200 last year. Mr. Wong thanked 
Carolyn Macmillan and her staff for a job well done. 

2) On Thursday, January 10, the Waterfront EIR was certified. He thanked not only 
all the different agencies involved but in particular Port staff - Anne Cook, Diane 

M011497.igq -1- 



Oshima, Kari Kilstrom, Kate Nichol, Dan Hodapp, Floristine Johnson and 
Noreen Ambrose. Everyone did a fabulous job and he looks forward to 
continuing the process. 

3) In December, Jim Augustino, a good friend of the Port, passed away. 

Supervisors Yaki and Kaufman introduced a resolution to rename Pier 7 in tribute 
to Mr. Augustino. A resolution will be brought to the Commission for approval 
sometime in February. 

Commissioner Hardeman and the Commission welcomed Mr. Wong to the Port. 

4. LEGISLATIVE 

5. TENANT & MARITIME SERVICES 

A. A pproval of month-to-month lease with National Maritime Museum Association at 
Pier 45 for USS Pampanito. (Resolution No. 97-02) 

Mr. Kirk Bennett, Port's Senior Property Manager, stated that since June 1981 the 
National Maritime Museum Association has leased apron and berthing space adjacent 
to Shed A at Pier 45 for the display of the USS Pampanito. The Association pays a 
monthly minimum fee of $540.00 (or $.05 per sq.ft. based of apron space) versus a 
percentage fee based upon 6% of gross receipts. During the Fiscal Year 1995/1996, 
the Association generated sales of more than a million dollars and paid total fees to the 
Port of over $60,000. Prior to the 1989 earthquake, the Association also leased 
adjacent storage space in Shed A, but had to vacate the space after the earthquake. As 
a result, the Association had to close its retail shop on the apron, moved some of its 
support facilities into this retail shop and onto the apron, and removed the remaining 
support facilities from Pier 45. Since the repairs have been made to Shed A, Port 
staff has negotiated two leases with the Association. The first lease is for 2,024 sq.ft. 
of shed space inside of Shed A for office, storage and maintenance uses directly 
related to the operation of the USS Pampanito with a monthly base rent of $.45 per 
sq. ft. This use and rent fall within the leasing parameters of the Port Commission 
and do not require specific approval by the Commission. The other lease is a month- 
to-month lease for the berthing of USS Pampanito, with a monthly base rent of $. 15 
per sq. ft. , which also falls within the leasing parameters of the Commission. 
However, the uses under this lease are somewhat unique and therefore approval from 
the Commission is requested. 

The following are the basic parameters of the lease: (1) The premises are 15,921 sq. 
ft. of apron space and 8,736 sq. ft. of water space located adjacent to Shed A at Pier 
45 for the USS Pampanito. (2) The term of the lease is month-to-month. (3) The 
Association has the nonexclusive use of the apron as access and support facilities for 
the USS Pampanito. They also have exclusive use of the berth for the berthing of the 
USS Pampanito. The Association may use a gift shop located on the apron for the 
sale of gift items related to the USS Pampanito, the National Maritime Park and the 
Association. The Association may use a ticket booth located on the apron for the sale 



M0U497.igq 



-2- 



of tickets to board and tour the USS Pampanito. The Association also agrees to allow 
access to the apron portion of the premises by the public during normal business 
hours. (4) The base rent is $2400 per month (or $.15 per sq.ft.). (5) The percentage 
rent is offset by the base rent they pay. Ticket sales are 6% . Gift shop sales are 9% . 
(6) The Association will be responsible for all maintenance and repairs to the premises 
except for the pier substructure. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy 

seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the 
resolution was adopted. 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

A. Authorization to advertise for competitive bids on Construction Contract No. 2622. 
"Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit." for earthquake damage repairs. (Resolution No. 
97-03 V 

Mr. Cliff Jarrard, Chief Harbor Engineer, stated that in 1989, the Pier 48 bulkhead 
buildings incurred significant damage. FEMA wrote a damage survey report for 
$9,000. After long negotiations with FEMA and OES, staff was able to get 
significant money and was able to convince the agencies to hire a consultant to 
analyze the damage and come up with the best method of repair for the facility. The 
Commission authorized GKO Engineering Company to analyze the damage, determine 
the most cost effective method of repair and develop contract documents for the 
seismic repair. GKO has completed the contract document and Port staff has 
assembled the contract package for competitive bid. The retrofit includes driving new 
steel piles to support the concrete bulkhead exterior walls, pouring new concrete grade 
beams and structural slabs, jacking-up the existing exterior concrete walls, repairing 
the cracks in the existing exterior concrete walls, installing new steel braced frames 
and plywood roof diaphragm and abating hazardous materials. MBE participation 
will be 23%; WBE participation will be 12%. It is anticipated that FEMA/OES will 
fund the entire cost of the seismic retrofit. 

Commissioner Lee commented that he reviewed the drawings and found them to be 
complete. His questions and concerns were addressed by Mr. Jarrard and Mr. Roger. 
He stated that this is not an easy job but is confident that they will do a good job. 

ACTION: Commissioner Lee moved approval; Commissioner Cook seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

B. Approval to declare a utility underground district along Terry A. Francois Boulevard 
from 800 feet south of the southerly intersection of Mission Rock and Terry A. 
Francois Boulevard to north of the southerly intersection of China Basin Street and 
Terry A. Francois Boulevard. (Resolution No. 97-04) 

Mr. Jarrard stated that the Commission approved the conceptual design of Pier 52 on 

M011497.igq -3- 



October 22, 1996. The project involves funding from Cal Boating. In order to design 
the proposed parking lot in accordance with Cal Boating requirements, it is necessary 
to reroute the overhead power lines that currently run along the west side of Terry 
Francois Blvd. The most economical way to finance the utility relocation is to have 
the area declared an Underground District. Both the Board of Supervisors and the 
Port Commission approval is necessary for PG&E to reroute electrical lines 
underground at no cost to the Port. However, under the City's agreement with 
PG&E, the Port must provide street lights where the overhead poles are removed. 
The Port will incur the cost of providing underground power service for those tenants 
that are currently connected to the overhead power lines. The new services and lights 
will cost the Port $35,000, which are currently in the Pier 52 budget. Staff also 
recommends that the Underground District be extended to the corner of Terry A. 
Francois Blvd. and China Basin so that when future funds become available, utilities 
in this additional area can be relocated underground. The current estimated cost for 
the Port to provide private services and street lights in this extended area is an 
additional $85,000. 

Commissioner Lee inquired who will be paying for the utility relocation. Mr. Jarrard 
responded that the utility company will be paying for the relocation. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded 
the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

C. Authorization to issue a Request for Proposals for soil and groundwater 
characterization and management services. (Resolution No. 97-05^ 

Mr. Jarrard stated that in 1987, the Port removed 14 abandoned underground storage 
tanks. When the removal took place, the soil around the tanks was not remediated. 
Since that time, ten storage tank sites have been declared closed but four sites still 
remain to be closed. Staff seeks to engage an outside consultant to provide expert 
consulting services for soil and groundwater characterization and management. The 
following is the scope of the work: (1) Investigation of and remedial action planning 
to address contamination at former underground fuel storage tank sites and (2) On an 
as-needed basis, assessment of potential soil and groundwater contamination and 
evaluation and implementation of appropriate remedial action or other management 
measures. The Port currently avails itself of these services through the Department of 
Public Works. Having a consultant on board will allow the Port greater access and is 
cost effective. The cost of the work is estimated between $200,000-$250,000 and the 
funds are budgeted in the Port's Capital Plan. 

In response to Commissioner Herman's inquiry regarding the $250,000 cost, Mr. 
Jarrard replied that this is to hire a consultant for performing the tasks. 
Commissioner Herman inquired about the term of the contract. Mr. Jarrard 
responded that the consultant will be on board for 18 months to perform tests for soil 
or water as the need arises. 



M011497.igq 



Commissioner McCarthy inquired how many sites are going to be remediated. Mr. 
Jarrard responded that the first task deals with the four sites. The other task deals with 
the entire Port. Staff will direct the consultant to perform the test and will be billed 
accordingly. The rates are fixed and staff approves segments of work and pay only 
whatever is needed. 

Commissioner Cook stated that the resolution is open-ended. He suggested 
identifying the four sites and provide information on the specific work to be done. 
Mr. Jarrard replied that the four sites where the underground tanks were at: (1) Pier 
80; (2) Pier 70; (3) 333 Illinois Street and (4) 145 Terry Francois Blvd. 
Commissioner Cook inquired if the primary work to be done by the consultant is to 
further identify the amount of contamination and the removal of contamination found. 
Mr. Jarrard replied that there will be no removal involved; only the identification of 
what else needs to be done. There will be an additional cost for remediation, since 
this is beyond the scope of work. 

Commissioner Lee clarified that this is a very common type of contract utilized by big 
corporations and government agencies. This is an as-needed contract. The agency 
usually has some work in mind. The magnitude of work, however, is not immediately 
known. Instead of staff requesting approval from the Commission for each project, 
staff selects a competent consultant and signs a contract for a maximum fee. Staff will 
identify the task and negotiate with the consultant. The hourly rate for each task is 
established and pre-approved. On each task order, the staff and the consultant has to 
delineate how many hours are needed to perform each task. The advantage of this 
contract is the agency has the upper hand. The better the consultant performs, the 
better their chances are of being offered more tasks. If the consultant does not 
perform well, the Port has the option of terminating the existing contract and seeking 
other consultants. Mr. Jarrard confirmed Commissioner Lee's explanation. 

Commissioner Herman stated that the Port is going to spend $250,000 for the project 
but did not see anything in the package that the Port has the option of terminating the 
arrangement if the consultant does not perform accordingly. Commissioner Lee stated 
that staff will give the task order one at a time as needed. Roberta Jones, 
Environmental Control Manager, clarified that the fact that it is a $250,000 contract 
does not mean that the Port is pledging to give them any minimum amount. If the 
consultant does a good job on the first task, the Port will continue to use them for the 
next task. Staff tries to anticipate redevelopment and construction projects. The 
magnitude of the job is not always immediately known. This type of arrangement is 
very useful. Staff feels that it will have more control and would be able to save the 
Port money if it has its own consultant to perform the same functions that DPW 
consultants have been performing. Staff will negotiate with consultants prior 
commencement of tasks. 

Commissioner Herman inquired if a motion can be made to table this item. 
Commissioner Hardeman stated that the motion has been moved and seconded. 
Staff's explanation of saving the Port money and having more control over the project 
is a reasonable proposal. Commissioner Lee stated that this is a common type of 



M011497.igq 



contract used by government agencies. It gives staff flexibility and control on 
spending and consultant's performance. He added that this is a great idea and 
advocates the Port to have more of this type of contract. He concluded that this is 
good for the Port. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. A pproval of Amendment to Landing Ri ghts License for Common Carrier Ferry 

Service Landing SlotCs) to provide rental credits for modifications to ramping system 
at Pier Vi. (Resolution No. 97-06) THIS ITEM WAS PUT OVER TO THE NEXT 
MEETING. 

Mr. Paul Osmundson, Acting Director of Planning & Development, stated that this 
item is to request amendment to a Landing Agreement with ferry operators who use 
Pier Vi . The City of Vallejo is constructing two new ferry vessels scheduled to 
commence service in April. The existing ramping system needs to be modified to 
allow passengers to safely disembark. The existing ramping system requires 
passenger circulation directly on the float deck, which can be hazardous during 
inclement weather. The ramping and fendering systems need to be modified to 
correct these conditions. All of the ferry operators that use the Pier Vz float currently 
pay landing fees under the Landing Rights License between the Port and the 
operators. The landing fees are structured to generate revenue to the Port to pay for 
the annual maintenance and operating costs of the Pier Vi float. The cost of designing 
and constructing the new ramping and fendering systems is estimated to be 
approximately $140,000. The other common carrier ferry service operators (Red & 
White, Harbor Bay Isle and the City of Alameda) would reimburse the City of Vallejo 
for specific agreed-upon amounts based upon their estimated landing activity at a cost 
not to exceed $140,000. Based on the landing activity levels of the past several years, 
it would take 15 months to recapture their cost. The regular common carrier ferry 
service landing fees would resume once the operators have recaptured their costs. 
During the rent credit period, the Port will pay for the maintenance and operating 
costs of the Pier Vi float from its operating budget. 

Commissioner Cook reiterated Mr. Osmundson's comments that the City of Vallejo is 
building new ferry boats which do not conform with the existing ferry boat design and 
that the Port will subsidize them. Mr. Osmundson concurred and added that they 
have a provision in their contract with the boat builder that they have to meet either 
the existing ramping systems at all bay area landing facilities or the boat builder 
would have to pay for the modification of the ramps. However, in conversations with 
other ferry operators, they have expressed frustration and concern about the existing 
ramping system because only certain boats can land on certain sides for they all have 
different configurations. This proposal will accommodate Vallejo's new boats and 
staff feels that it is the Port's responsibility to make the ramping system to meet the 

M011497.igq -6- 



ferry boat operators' needs. 

Commissioner Cook inquired if the Port will then be responsible for conforming its 
facility if Red & White decides to build ferry boats that don't conform. He is 
concerned about specifically doing something for Vallejo when may be the Port 
shouldn't even be responsible. He pointed that the City of Vallejo should build a boat 
that conforms with the existing facility or they should be paying for the changes that 
the Port is making or there should be a shared expense similar to some of the Port's 
leases. The Port may assist them and treat it as a tenant improvement but the Port 
should not pay 100% of it. He suggested that City of Vallejo should contribute 50% 
of the cost. Mr. Osmundson stated that what this motion would do is authorize the 
Executive Director or his designee to negotiate the terms of an amendment and in our 
negotiations, ask Vallejo to pay for a share of this cost as their boat builder will 
contribute to the cost. He pointed out that, with the exception of the $140,000, 
funding for the Downtown Ferry Terminal Project ($17 million) is provided by the 
State and federal grants for the improvements to the ferry facilities, public access and 
relocation of berths. He stated that Veronica Sanchez has been spectacularly 
successful in getting public funding for this project. In the larger scheme of 
improvements to the ferry operations on the bay, $140,000 is a small contribution; 
however, staff will certainly negotiate with Vallejo for their share of the cost. 

Commissioner Cook stated that if the resolution is adopted as is it would not put the 
Port in a strong negotiation position with the City of Vallejo. The ship builders 
should perhaps be subsidizing the Port of San Francisco for their change in design of 
the ferry boat. He suggested putting this item over to the next meeting until staff has 
had the opportunity to negotiate with the City of Vallejo. He thinks that this 
resolution puts the Port in a position of subsidizing more than it does. He is 
concerned about setting precedence. 

Commissioner McCarthy commented that she too had the same concerns. She 
wondered if this expenditure is on the budget since the Port will be subsidizing the 
operation. Mr. Osmundson replied that the operating cost is budgeted in the expense 
budget. The revenues are intended to offset the cost and the Port will eventually 
recoup the cost of this project. Commissioner Hardeman inquired about the design of 
the boats and wondered if it is a new prototype or is it a universal design and if 
certain safety features are included in the design. Mr. Osmundson replied that he is 
not certain if it is a universal design but the general characteristics follow that design 
concept. 

Mr. Wong suggested tabling this item to the next meeting. Staff will call appropriate 
sources in Vallejo and begin negotiations. Mr. Osmundson reiterated that Port staff 
will meet with the City of Vallejo officials and discuss their share of the cost of the 
improvement. 

8. ADMINISTRATION 

9. MARKETING 



M011497.igq 



-7- 



10. CONSENT CALENDAR 

11. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

Kathy Hallinan, representing the Street Artists, inquired about their December 18 
correspondence requesting the Commission to place the street artists item back on the 
Commission agenda. Commissioner Hardeman suggested that Ms. Hallinan meet with 
staff. Mr. Wong directed Ms. Hallinan to meet with Kirk Bennett and he will, in turn, 
bring the recommendation to the Commission. 

Commissioner Preston Cook commented that he is concerned about the tone of the street 
artists letters. He stated that the group's accusations of the Commission are false. A year 
and a half ago, the Commission voted to change the street artists locations. At the 
December 10, 1996 meeting, the Commission chose not to discuss a location change that 
the street artists requested. The item has been discussed, the item has been voted on. The 
group's treatment of the Commission has been less than democratic as evidenced in the 
tone of their letters. Hearings were held and the group has had their opportunity to speak 
on the matter. The Commission has made a decision and the Commission has been very 
fair with the group. 

Ms. Hallinan responded that at the last meeting, the group was shocked by the defeat of 
the item that died without a second. They did not get an opportunity to discuss their case. 
She will communicate the Commissioner's concern of the tone of their letters to the writer. 
However, the frustration they are experiencing is that this item was brought to the 
Commission twice. Port staff recommended approval of this item. Commissioner 
Hardeman interjected and stated that the Executive Director has directed staff to meet with 
her group. 

Bill Fiore, representative of UFCW Local 101, gave the Commission an update 
concerning the dispute between the union and the workers of H&N Fish Company. He 
noted that the Human Rights Commission has been very diligent. Several affidavits have 
been taken and he hopes that a determination of their findings will be presented to the 
Commission shortly. He hopes that the National Labor Relations Board will be handing 
down the decision to the union's favor. 

Commissioner Hardeman mentioned that it is a great honor to be President of this 
Commission and thanked the Commission for their vote of confidence. Commissioner 
McCarthy stated that she too is honored and thanked the Commission for their support. 
She was pleased that the vote was unanimous. Commissioner Hardeman then thanked 
Commissioner Lee for his two years as Vice President of the Commission. 

12. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

At 5:07 p.m., the Commission Secretary announced that the Commission will withdraw to 
executive session to discuss the following: 

A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT 

M011497.igq -8- 



1) Confirmation of Appointment of Director of Tenant Services 

2) Confirmation of Appointment of Director of Planning & Development 

An executive session to discuss this matter is specifically authorized under 
California Government Code Section 54957. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING ANTICIPATED 
LITIGATION MATTER: 

1) Discuss significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 (1 case). 

D. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 
Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 

Commissioners Hardeman, Lee, Cook, McCarthy and Herman returned from 
executive session and convened in public session at 6:30 p.m. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval to not disclose any 

information discussed in the executive session other than Item 12A, 
Confirmation of Paul Osmundson as Director of Planning & 
Developement and Vivian Fei Tsen as Director of Tenant Services; 
Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were 
in favor. 

The meeting was adjourned at 6:32 p.m. 



M0U497.igq 



-9- 



.SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

s 

REGULAR MEETING 



4:00 P.M.yJANlJA RY 28, 199p 
FERRY BUILDING, SUITE 3100 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 



.AGENDA 



07 



1. ROLL CALL 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
JAN 2 31997 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 14, 1997 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Executive Director's Report 

4. LEGISLATIVE 

5. TENANT & MARITIME SERVICES 



A. Consent to assignment of retail lease from Don Maskell and Caroline Mary Maskell to 
Arthur N. Hoppe, resetting percentage rental, encumbrance of leasehold regarding 
premises at 496 Jefferson Street, and approval of month-to-month retail lease with 
Arthur N. Hoppe for adjacent premises. (Resolution No. 97-08) 

B. Approval of percentage rental adjustments for Chez Laura Enterprises, Inc. at 300 
Jefferson Street and for St. Francis Marine Center at 835 Terry A. Francois Blvd. 
(Resolution No. 97-07) 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

8. ADMINISTRATION 

9. MARKETING 

10. CONSENT CALENDAR 

11. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 



) 



A012897.igq 



•1- 



) 



12. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING PERSONNEL MATTER 
1) Discuss personnel matter pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957. 

B . CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING 
LITIGATION MATTER: 

1) Discuss existing litigation matter pursuant to subdivision (a) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 

a. Petuya v. CCSF; San Francisco Superior Court No. 972-961 

D. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 
Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 

13. ADJOURNMENT 

Public comment is permitted on any matter within Port jurisdiction, and is not limited to agenda 
items. Public comment on non-agenda items may be raised during New Business/Public 
Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the Commission Secretary . 



A012897.igq 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



January 16, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 04CO 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James R. Herman 



FROM: Douglas F. Wong 

Executive Director 



e& 



SUBJECT: Consent to assignment of retail lease from Don Maskell and Caroline Mary 
Maskell to Arthur N. Hoppe, resetting percentage rental and encumbrance of 
leasehold regarding premises located at 496 Jefferson Street, and approval of 
month-to-month retail lease with Arthur N. Hoppe for adjacent premises. 



DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: 



CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE. 
RESETTING PERCENTAGE RENTAL, AND 
ENCUMBRANCE OF LEASEHOLD, AND 
APPPROVE MONTH-TO-MONTH LEASE 



Maskell Marine Services 

Maskell Marine Services, located at 496 Jefferson Street, operates under two tenancy agreements: 

1. Port Lease No. L-8992 ("Lease L-8992"), whose 61 -year term commenced 
May 1, 1975 and terminates April 30, 2036; and 

2. Port License No. L-8992- A ("License"), which commenced December 1, 1982, and 
continues on a month-to-month basis. The License covers a portion of the retail building 
that encroaches on the Hyde Street right-of way. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 5-A 



Agenda Item No. 5-A 
Page 2 

The basic parameters of these tenancy agreements are as follows: 



Parameter 

Tenant 

Premises 

Term 

Use 

Minimum monthly rent/fee 



Percentage Rental 



Chandlery sales and 
instrument repair 

Clothing, gifts, and all other 

Sales exempt from percentage 
rental 



Assignable 



Lease L-8992 

Don Maskell and Caroline Mary 
Maskell, husband and wife 

9,890 sq.ft. 

61 years 

Retail and wholesale sales outlet for 
chandlery, clothing and nautical gifts, 
and marine instrument sales and repairs 

$7,717.00 



License 

Don Maskell 

532 sq. ft. 

Month-to-month 

Chandlery and 
souvenir sales 

$0.00 



7.0% 
10% 



Not applicable 
10% 



Repair of marine safety equipment, sales Not applicable 
made per competitive or formal bids, 
and sales to commercial users 



Yes, subject to reasonable consent of 
Port 



No, except by 
consent bv Port 



The gross sales generated by Maskell Marine Services on the combined premises during the 
1995/1996 Fiscal Year totaled $1,427,597. Thirty-six percent of these gross sales involved 
chandlery, and sixty-four percent involved clothing, gifts, and other merchandize. The total 
(minimum and percentage) rental paid to the Port by Maskell Marine Services during the 
1995/1996 Fiscal Year was $131,528. 

Lease L-8992 provides that the percentage rental shall be subject to review not more often than 
every five years, based upon changes in the rates of percentage rental for like uses in San 
Francisco in the vicinity of the leased premises. The last time that the percentage rental for 
Lease L-8992 was adjusted was in May, 1982. 



Agenda Item No. 5-A 
Page 3 

In 1995, the Port retained a consultant to perform a market survey and analysis regarding 
percentage rentals, including those for retail uses. Based upon the survey and analysis of this 
consultant, input provided by Port tenants, and Port staffs own consideration and review of the 
data available to it, Port staff recommended to the Port Commission at its April 9, 1996 meeting 
that the percentage rental for retail uses under three Port leases be reset at 8.75 % . Like Maskell 
Marine Services, these businesses are responsible for all repairs and maintenance of then- 
premises, but, in that they are not located over the water, they are not responsible for pier 
substructure maintenance. By Resolution No. 96-34, the Port Commission approved this 
recommendation. 

Proposed Sale and Lease Assignment 

The Assignor has entered into an Agreement of Sale to sell the Maskell Marine Services business 
to Arthur N. Hoppe ("Assignee"). At its March 26, 1996 meeting, by Resolution No. 96-27 the 
Port Commission approved the assignment of another lease to the Assignee involving premises 
formerly occupied by the Fish Alley Bar and Grill. The Assignee is now completing the 
redevelopment of this property into an Italian market place, with the name of Piazza Del Mare. 
This new operation, which is expected to open for business next month, will involve restaurant 
uses with a seafood and Italian theme, with less than a quarter of the facility being devoted to 
retail sales of wines and food oriented items. The Assignee also operates five other retail 
businesses at Fisherman's Wharf, four of them along Jefferson Street (The Bay Company, Bay 
Stop, Forecast Jeans, and The Forecast), and one at Pier 39 (Beach Bums). 

The purchase price for this business is 5467,500, of which $247,500 is in the form of a five-year 
promissory note with monthly installment payments of principal and interest. After the sale, Don 
and Caroline Maskell will continue their involvement with Maskell Marine Services under 
employment contracts. 

The Assignee's vision for the business is indicated in the following excerpt from a letter that he 
wrote to the Port: 

"My vision for the location is very simple — to improve upon what Don and Caroline 
have very ably created over the years. I'm very comfortable with the use that exists. The 
mix of chandlery items, clothing and gifts is the ideal use for the location and for me. It's 
what I do best. 

"The nautical theme is also, obviously, a key to the location. Every item sold in the store 
should, and will, revolve around a nautical theme. Again, Don and Caroline have done 
an excellent job creating a nautical atmosphere throughout the store. But I also think I can 
improve upon what they have built. 



) 



Agenda Item No. 5- A 
Page 4 

"The chandlery is a vital pan of the 'feeling' of the store. The paddles, the lines, the 
fenders, the charts - they all add to the sense that Maskell Marine is a nautical store. I'll 
have the basic chandlery items that give the store its image. They won't sell very well, 
but they're important nonetheless. 

"Maskell Marine has produced excellent revenue for the Port over the years by increasing 
the amount of inventory and developing further the nautical merchandize techniques. I 
believe Maskell Marine can produce much more revenue and continue to be a store that 
is a strong asset to the Port and the City both financially and visually." 

PROPOSAL 

In order to complete this sale, the Assignee needs the Port Commission to approve a Consent 
Agreement concerning Lease L-8992, and approve a new month-to-month lease ("Lease -12398") 
to replace the existing License. Port staff has negotiated a Consent Agreement and the new 
Lease L-12398, whose fundamental provisions are indicated below. 

Proposed Consent Agreement 

1 . Consent to Assignment : Port will consent to the assignment, subject to the Assignor not 
being released from the Tenant obligation under Lease L-8992. Any amendment made by 
Port and Assignee without Assignor's prior written consent will have no force or effect 
against Assignor, but Assignor shall not unreasonably withhold or delay such consent. 
Port agrees to notify Assignor of any default under the Lease, and Assignor shall nave the 
same rights as the Assignee to cure such a default. 

2. Agreement to resetting Percentage Rental: The percentage rental will be reset, as of 
the close of the sale, as follows: 

Chandlery sales and instrument repair 8.75% 

Clothing, gifts and all Other 8.75% 

The following will continue to be excluded from gross receipts in calculating percentage 
rental: repair of marine safety equipment, sales made per competitive or formal bid, and 
sales to commercial users. Except for these exclusions, the same percentage rate will be 
be paid for all types of sales. Applying this single percentage rental to the total gross sales 
during the 1995/96 Fiscal Year would result in almost the same percentage rental being 
due as with the differing percentage rental rates now in effect. 



) 



Agenda Item No. 5-A 
Page 5 

3. Encumbrance : The Port will consent to a $247,500 encumbrance of the leasehold by the 
Assignor. 

4. Effective Date : The Consent Agreement will be effective upon the date that escrows closes 

pursuant to the Agreement of Sale. In the event that this sale does not close, the Consent 
Agreement shall be null and void. 

Proposed Lease -12398 

1. Tenant : Arthur N. Hoppe 

2. Premises : Approximately 532 sq.ft. retail space which encroaches on Hyde 

Street Right-of-Way 

3. Term : Month-to-Month 

4. Use : Retail sales of chandlery, clothing, gifts and souvenir merchandise 

5. Base Monthly Rent : $1,331.00 ($2.50 per sq. ft.) 

6. Percentage Rent : Percentage Rent shall be paid monthly based on 8.75% of gross 

receipts. The combined percentage rent due under Lease-12398 and 
Lease-8992 shall be offset by the base/minimum rent paid under 
both of these leases. 



Prepared by: Kirk W. Bennett, Sr. Property Manager 
Northern Waterfront/Fisherman's Wharf 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\HOPPE.KBUanuary 16, 1997 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97- 09 



WHEREAS, 



Charter Section B3.581 empowers the Port Commission with the power 
and duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and 
control the Port area of San Francisco; and 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



) 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



under Charter Section B3. 581(g) leases granted or made by the Port 
Commission shall be administered exclusively by the operating forces of 
the Port Commission; and 

Port Lease L-8992, dated November 26, 1975, as amended ("Lease L- 
8992") with Don Maskell and Caroline Mary Maskell (successors and 
interest to J.C. Hendry Company), as tenant (the "Assignor"), provides 
that assignment of Lease L-8992 requires the consent of the Port, which 
consent shall not be unreasonably withheld; and 

Port Commission consent has been requested for the assignment of Lease 
L-8992 from Assignor to Arthur N. Hoppe ("Assignee") and for the 
encumbrance of the leasehold by the Assignor; and 

pursuant to Section 2 (c) of Lease L-8992, the percentage rental due is 
subject to review and adjustment based upon changes in the rates of 
percentage rental for like uses in San Francisco in the vicinity of the 
leased premises; and 

Port License L-8992-A, which is a small 532 sq.ft. portion of a larger 
building leased under Lease L-8992 that encroaches on the Hyde Street 
right-of-way, is not assignable, except with the prior consent of the Port; 
and 



WHEREAS, 



RESOLVED, 



2> 



Port Commission consent has been requested for the transfer of the 
leasehold interest in the premises demised in License L-8992-A from 
Assignor to Assignee; now therefore be it 

the Port Commission consents to the assignment of Lease L-8992 to 
Assignee and the encumbrance of the leasehold by the Assignor, subject 
to the conditions indicated in the memorandum to the Port Commission 
for Agenda Item No. 5- A for the Port Commission meeting on January 
28, 1997, and authorizes the Executive Director, or his designee, to 
enter into a consent agreement in such form as is substantially in the 
form on file in the Secretary of the Port Commission for Agenda Item 
5-A, and in such final form as approved by the City Attorney; and be it 
further 



Page 2 

Resolution No. 97- 09 



) 



RESOLVED, 



that the Port Commission determines that the percentage rental for like 
uses in San Francisco in the vicinity of the leased premises have been 
increased to the rate indicated in the memorandum to the Port 
Commission for Agenda Item No. 5-A for the Port Commission meeting 
on January 28, 1997; and be it further 



RESOLVED, 



that the percentage rental rate for Lease L-8992 shall be adjusted as of 
the effective date of the assignment of the lease to 8.75% of gross 
receipts for chandlery and instrument repair, and for clothing, gifts, and 
all other; and be it further 



RESOLVED, 



that the Port Commission hereby approves Lease- 12398, which 
incorporates the business terms set forth in the memorandum for Agenda 
Item No. 5-A for the Port Commission meeting on January 28, 1997, and 
authorizes the Executive Director, or his designee, to enter into Lease 
12398 in such final form as is substantially in the form on file with the 
Secretary of the Port Commission for Agenda Item No. 5-A and as such 
final form as approved by the City Attorney. 



) 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of January 28, 1997. 



Secretary 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\HOPPE.KB\ibn\January 16. 1997 



LICENSE 



L- 8992 A 



LEASE 12398 




LEASE L-8992 



JEFFERSON STREET 



3; 



MASKELL MARINE SERVICES 
496 JEEEERSON STREET 
SWL 303 



1-14-97 G: \ GOudley\ leas^ sw/JOJm 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



January 16, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSFUR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James R. Herman 

Douglas F. Wong y®* 
Executive Director 



SUBJECT: Approval of percentage rental adjustments for Chez Laura Enterprises, 
Incorporated at 300 Jefferson Street and for St. Francis Marine Center at 835 Terry 
A. Francois Boulevard. 



DIRECTORS RECOMMENDATION: 



APPROVE PERCENTAGE RENTAL 
ADJUSTMENTS SET FORTH HEREIN 



The 30-year lease with Chez Laura Enterprises, Incorporated (Port Lease No. L-9798) and the 
20-year lease with St. Francis Marine Center (Port Lease No. L-11211) ("collectively Subject 
Leases") both provide for the payment of percentage rental to the Port. Both also provide that 
the percentage rental is subject to review and adjustment on or before the anniversary date every 
five years during the lease term. If the rates of percentage rental for like uses in San Francisco 
in the vicinity have increased or decreased as of the adjustment date, then the Port is to adjust the 
rate of percentage rental for the leases accordingly. If the tenant disagrees on the amount of the 
adjustment, the tenant has the right to terminate the lease without liability for future rent. 



The percentage rentals provided for in Subject Leases vary for different types of uses, 
existing uses and rental rates for these leases are indicated below. 



The 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 5-B 



Page 2 



Chez Laura Enterprises St. Francis Marine 

Incorporated Center 

fL-9798) (L-11211) 

Food 6.0% 6.0% 

Alcoholic beverages & all other 

items sold through the bar 8.0% 8.0% 

Boat storage 20.0% 

Sublease revenues 10.0% 

Commissions received for tickets for 

sport fishing boats not owned by tenant 10.0% 






Sport fishing boats owned by tenant 5.0% 

All other uses 7.0% 10.0% 

In 1995, the Port retained a market consultant to perform a market survey and analysis of 
percentage rental, including restaurant and retail uses. Port staff has also recently concluded 
leases on Port property that confirm the market percentage rentals for boat storage and sublease 
revenues. Based upon the independent survey and analysis obtained from the Port's consultant, 
input provided by Port tenants, Port staffs experience in leasing property for similar uses, and 
Port staffs review of the data available, Port staff recommends percentage rental adjustments for 
the Subject Leases as indicated in the accompanying resolution No. 97- 07 . 



Prepared by: Kirk W. Bennett, Sr. Property Manager, 
Northern Waterfront/Fisherman's Wharf 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\CHEZLAUR.KB\January 16, 1997 






PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
RESOLUTION NO. 97-07 



WHEREAS, 



Charter Section B3.581 empowers the Port Commission with the power and 
duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and control the Port 
area of San Francisco; and 



WHEREAS, 



under Charter Section B3. 58 1(g) leases granted or made by the Port 
Commission shall be administered exclusively by the operating forces of the 
Port Commission; and 



WHEREAS, 



Port Lease No. L-9798 and Lease No. L-11211 ("Subject Leases") provide for 
adjustments in the percentage rentals based upon the determination that the 
percentage rentals for like uses in San Francisco in the vicinity of the leased 
premises have increased or decreased as of the date of the determination; and 
now therefore be it 



RESOLVED, 



that the Port Commission determines that the percentage rentals for the uses 
indicated below in San Francisco in the vicinity of the leased premises are as 
indicated below and that the percentage rentals for the Subject Leases shall be 
adjusted as indicated below, effective February 1, 1997, and the Port 
Commission authorizes the Executive Director, or his designee, to execute 
proper documentation as needed to implement this resolution. 





Chez Laura Enterprises 
Incorporated (L-9798) 


St. Francis Marine 
Center CL-1 121 n 


Food 




6.75% 


6.75% 


Alcoholic beverages & all other 
items sold through the bar 




6.75% 


6.75% 


Boat storage 






20.0% 


Sublease revenues 






50.0% 


Commissions received for tickets for 
sport fishing boats not owned by Tenant 


10.0% 




Sport fishing boats owned by Tenant 




5.0% 




All other uses 




8.75% 


8.75% 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its meeting of January 
28, 1997. 



Secretary 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\CHEZLAUR.KB\ibnUanuary 16, 1997 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

MINUTES OF THE MEETING 

JANUARY 28, 1997 



1. ROLL CALL 

The meeting was called to order by Commission President Michael Hardeman at 4:08 
p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Michael Hardeman, Frankie Lee, 
Preston Cook and James Herman. Commissioner Denise McCarthy was attending a 
conference in Palm Beach. 

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 14, 1997 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded the 

motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the minutes of the meeting 
were adopted. 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Executive Director's Report. Mr. Wong reported the following: 

1) He met with Tom Creedon of Scoma's Restaurant and the Fisherman's Wharf 
Association. They were delighted that the Port is going ahead with the 
Fisherman's Wharf Lighting project. The estimated completion date of the 
contract is June 1997. 

2) Kari Kilstrom, Port Planner, was designated the coordinator for the ballpark 
project. Ms. Kilstrom was one of the Port employees instrumental in managing 
the Waterfront Plan EIR, which was certified by City Planning Commission. 
Paul Osmundson and other Port employees will be working closely with Ms. 
Kilstrom regarding the project. 

3) On January 16, 1997, Will Travis, Executive Director of BCDC, presented to his 
Commission the concept agreement. A joint hearing with BCDC and the Port 
Commission was tentatively scheduled on February 20 in Oakland. However, 
Port staff learned that this meeting will be rescheduled to March 6 and the 
meeting with be held in San Francisco. He hopes that the Commission will be 
able to attend this meeting. Port staff anticipates holding a public hearing 
information presentation regarding the BCDC concept agreement on February 1 1 . 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

4. LEGISLATIVE 

OPT P E 1QQQ 

5. TENANT & MARITIME SERVICES 

SAN FRANCISCO 
M012897.igq -1- PUBLIC LIBRARY 



A. Consent to assignment of retail lease from Don Maskell and Caroline Mary Maskell to 
Arthur N. Hoppe. resetting percentage rental, encumbrance of leasehold regarding 
premises at 496 Jefferson Street, and approval of month-to-month retail lease with 
Arthur N. Hoppe for adjacent premises. (Resolution No. 97-08) 

Ms. Fei Tsen, Director of Real Estate and Asset Management, stated that she looks 
forward to working with the Commission and the new Executive Director. She 
intends to send the Commission a memo regarding her goals for the Division. She 
also intends to have the property managers, directly working on the properties, 
present the agenda item information to the Commission, when appropriate. 

Mr. Kirk Bennett, Senior Property Manager, stated that since 1982 Don and Caroline 
Maskell have owned and operated Maskell Marine Services. Mr. and Mrs. Maskell 
have entered into an Agreement of Sale to sell Maskell Marine Services to Nick 
Hoppe. Mr. Hoppe has the experience and the financial strength to run the business 
successfully. The business operates on two parcels: (1) 9,890 sq.ft. of retail and 
wholesale outlet, which operates under a 61 -year lease; (2) 532 sq. ft. of retail space, 
which operates under a month-to-month license. Port staff recommends that the 61- 
year lease be assigned. Under this assignment, the Assignor will remain liable under 
the lease. Port staff recommends that the month-to-month license be replaced with a 
new month-to-month lease document which provide for a base rent at market rate. 
The percentage rent will be paid on the combined business from both properties, 
which will be offset by the base rent. 

Two other components require Commission's approval: (1) as part of the Assignment, 
the Assignee requested that the Port allows him to take back a note for a part of the 
purchase price, which will be secured by the leasehold of the property; (2) the 
percentage rent under the long-term lease is now subject to adjustment pursuant to the 
provisions of the lease. 

Currently, the percentage rent for chandlery is different. Port staff recommends 
setting a single percentage rent at 8.75% for all sales tax on the property. As 
provided on the lease, sales for marine safety equipment, sales for competitive bid and 
sales to commercial users would be exempt from paying a percentage rent. This 
percentage rent is consistent with the percentage rent that was reset last year. The 
actual percentage rent paid to the Port is essentially the same as what they have paid 
in the past under the split percentage rent. Setting a single percentage rent will 
simplify the sales reporting and auditing of the sales. 

In response to Commissioner Herman's inquiry regarding the prior percentage rent, 
Mr. Bennett replied that the lease currently provides 7% for chandlery and 10% for 
gifts, clothing and other types of merchandise. He reiterated staff's recommendation, 
based on market studies, that the percentage rent is set at 8.75% for all items. 
Commissioner Herman stated that the percentage rent is a little exorbitant and 
inquired if staff has abandoned the standard measurement for rent increases. Mr. 
Bennett replied to the negative and explained that Commissioner Herman is referring 



M012897.igq 



to the base rent, which, under the provisions of the lease, is automatically adjusted by 
cost of living increase every five years. Consequently, this particular lease is subject 
to review and adjustment every five years. 

Mr. Don Maskell thanked the Commission for approving the transfer of the lease. He 
stated that he will be available for the next five years working on the Hyde 
Street/ Jefferson Street area. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

B. A pproval of percentage rental adjustments for Chez Laura Enterprises. Inc. at 300 
Jefferson Street and for St. Francis Marine Center at 835 Terry A. Francois Blvd. 
(Resolution No. 97-07) 

Mr. Bennett stated that Lease No. 9798 for Chez Laura Enterprises and Lease No. 
11211 for St. Francis Marine are subject for review. The existing percentage rent for 
Chez Laura Enterprises is: food 6%, alcoholic beverages 8%, commissions received 
for tickets for sport fishing boats not owned by tenant 10%, sport fishing boats owned 
by tenant 5%, all other uses 7%. The existing percentage rent for St. Francis Marine 
is: food 6%, alcoholic beverages 8%, boat storage 20%, sublease revenues 10%, all 
other uses 10%. 

Based upon the independent survey and analysis obtained from the Port's consultant, 
staff recommends the following percentage rental adjustments: food, alcoholic 
beverages and other items sold through the bar 6.75%, no change for boat storage, the 
sublease revenues for St. Francis Marine 50% and all other uses 8.75%. The 
recommended percentage rent adjustments are consistent with the percentage rents set 
a year ago and the tenants are in agreement with the proposed percentage rental 
adjustments. 

Commissioner Lee inquired about the size of the tenants' premises. Mr. Bennett 
replied that Chez Laura's area is approximately 2,000 sq. ft. and St. Francis Marine 
has a sizable boat yard space. 

Commissioner Herman inquired about the sublease revenue increase of 50% . Mr. 
Bennett replied that in the last few years, the Port's standard lease required 100% of 
the profits from tenants' subleases because the tenants were leasing space to 
businesses to run other business. In the lease renegotiations, the Port will receive half 
of the profit that the tenant receives because of entreprenuerial involvement to achieve 
the subleases. 

Commisioner Herman commented that this is a high increase. Mr. Bennett replied 
that it is indeed a high increase but it reflects the real estate market. 

Commissioner Cook pointed out that according to the 1996 leasing summary, Port 



M012897.igq 



staff executed 1 18 new and existing leases. There were 16 new tenants last year. 
Approximately 700,000 sq. ft. of space were leased, representing $1 million new net 
revenue for the Port. He commended the division for a job well done. 

ACTION: Commissioner Lee moved approval; Commissioner Cook seconded the 
motion. Three of the Commissioners were in favor; Commissioner 
Herman cast the dissenting vote. The resolution was adopted. 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

8. ADMINISTRATION 

9. MARKETING 

10. CONSENT CALENDAR 

11. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

Juan Rivera stated that he is employed at H&N Fish, at their Jerrold Avenue location, for 
over ten years. Problems recently surfaced at the Pier 45 location. He, however, feels 
that the company has been good to him and added that the company is his future. 

William McKenzie, a 5-month employee of H&N Fish, stated that he has been treated by 
the company very well and enjoys working for them. 

Pablo Mendoza (as translated by Veronica Sanchez), a 4-month employee of H&N Fish, 
stated that H&N is a good company. They have given him better opportunities than other 
companies. He considers them a good company, without discriminating any worker and 
they all work as a family. 

Carmen Sanchez (as translated by Veronica Sanchez), an employee of H&N Fish, stated 
that the company has given her good experience. Her bosses and workers have all been 
good to her. 

Hilda Pelayo (as translated by Veronica Sanchez), an employee of H&N Fish, stated that 
she has a good job at H&N Fish and enjoys working there. The President and Vice 
President of the company have treated them well — there are no discrimination of any 
kind. The job is good for her and her future. 

Rene de Leon, an employee of H&N Fish for 3 months, stated that working at the 
company provides him better opportunity. He stated that the union is not needed in this 
company. He is happy with the company. The supervisor is a good person and have not 
gotten any complaints about his job. 

Isidro Linares (as translated by Veronica Sanchez) has been an employee of H&N Fish for 

M012897.igq -4- 



eight years. During the winter months, fishing season is slow but the company gives them 
other opportunities and looks forward to working at the company for more opportunities. 
The company is very generous. They are all happy with H&N and the opportunities they 
have given them. 

Victor Najarro (as translated by Veronica Sanchez) an employee of H&N Fish, stated that 
he is very happy with his bosses and his co-workers. 

Antonio Reyes, (as translated by Veronica Sanchez) is an employee of H&N Fish for two 
years. He resides in Santa Rosa. If he is not happy with H&N Fish, he would not be 
commuting to work in San Francisco every day. He came to this meeting voluntarily to 
testify that the company has been very good to him. 

Eric de Leon, an ex-employee of H&N Fish, (as translated by Veronica Sanchez) stated 
that he is in disagreement with the company. His papers, documents, working permits are 
in order but he was still laid off. He claims that the workers are happy now because 
recently the company gave them bonuses and benefits because of pressure from the union. 
He claims that a former manager used to exploit the workers and also has prior history 
from other companies. He has been a filleter of fish for seven years and does not know 
why he is paid by the hour. He pointed out that the company is not good. 

Commissioner Herman inquired about the base rate of pay for those employed by the 
company. Mr. Juan Rivera replied that ten years ago, it was $5.00 an hour. An employee 
now starts at $7.00 an hour. If one does a good job, after three months, the rate goes up 
to either $8 or $9 an hour. 

Commissioner Herman then inquired if the employees are paid medical benefits, holidays 
and vacations. Mr. Rivera replied to the affirmative and added that they also get paid for 
the Chinese New Year holiday. Commissioner Herman inquired if a union election was 
held. Mr. Rivera replied that the majority voted against the union. Commissioner Lee 
inquired about the results of the vote. Mr. Rivera replied that only one department 
participated — 21 employees voted against it and one for it. 

Commissioner Herman stated that in order to get a collective bargaining election, a 
majority of the workers needs to sign a card indicating their desire to join the union. He is 
concerned that many employees testified for the company and only one spoke against the 
company. He would like to review the minutes of the meeting and reserve the right to 
open the item for discussion and decide what needs to be done. 

Commissioner Cook reminded Commissioner Herman that the Commission has heard 
from the union in the previous meetings. He is delighted that the Commission has now 
heard from both sides and appreciative of the fact that the workers took the time to voice 
their opinion on this matter. 

Commissioner Herman pointed out that the workers appearing today made no case that 
they belong to a union. The Commission has been informed about a strong disagreement 
over many of the tactics used and whether the workers had a fair opportunity to vote for 



M012897.igq 



■5- 



the union. In addition, the Commission heard that workers were discharged after the vote 
was tallied. The last time this item was heard, the union representative, delegated by the 
worker, represented their aspirations for a union. 

An employee from H&N Fish interjected and stated none of the workers asked the union 
to represent them. 

Commissioner Hardeman interjected and stated that this item is not open for debate and 
remarks have to conclude. Legal Counsel John Rakow concurred and opined that this item 
may be calendared so that testimony from both sides can be presented. 

Kathy Hallinan, Street Artist, requested that their item be placed back on the 
Commission's agenda for discussion. She understood at the last meeting that she is to 
approach staff about this but she requested the Commission to suggest to staff to place the 
item back on the calendar. 

Commissioner Hardeman stated that the matter has been left in the hands of staff. 
Director Wong has directed staff; staff will give their recommendation to the Commission 

Commissioner Herman pointed out that the Commission has heard this issue on multiple 
occasions. The Commission has demonstrated how democracy is generously allowed at 
this forum. The Commission heard arguments from different people. The 
recommendation by the Commission, hearings by the Commission and the responses by 
the people who disagree with the Commission has been exhausted. There is no point in 
allowing the democratic procedure to deteriorate into harassing a Commission and allows 
for the debate of the judgement. In his judgement, the issue is now close. 

Ms. Hallinan stated that the item has not come up for staff's and Commission's perusal. 
Commissioner Hardeman stated that it was brought to the Commission but it did not 
receive a second. 

12. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

At 5:05 p.m., the Commission Secretary announced that the Commission will withdraw to 
executive session to discuss the following matters: 

A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING PERSONNEL MATTER 
1) Discuss personnel matter pursuant to California Government Code Section 54957. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 



M012897.igq -6- 



Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING 
LITIGATION MATTER: 

1) Discuss existing litigation matter pursuant to subdivision (a) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 

a. Petuya v. CCSF; San Francisco Superior Court No. 972-961 

At 5:50 p.m., Commissioners Hardeman, Lee, Cook and Herman returned from 
executive session and convened in public session. 

ACTION: Commissioner Lee moved approval to not disclose any information discussed 
in the executive session. Commissioner Cook seconded the motion. All of 
the Commissioners were in favor. 

The meeting was adjourned at 5:53 p.m. 



M012897.igq -7- 



/SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



* 



SPECIAL MEETING 



2:00 P.M. F EBRUARY 11, 199Z ^ 

FERRY BUILDING, SUITE 3100 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 



W* 



DOCUMENTS DEPT; ,$ 

FEB 6 1997 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



AGENDA 



kfr. 



£ 



ROLL CALL 



2. NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC COMMENT 

Public comment is permitted on any matter within, Port jurisdiction, and is not limited to 
agenda items. Public comment on non-agenda items may be raised during New 
Business/Public Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the Commission 
Secretary. 

3. EXECUTIVE SESSION ' 

A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Pier 80 ■■ 

Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*Home Depot Representative: Jim Lyon, Real Estate Manager, Western Region 



Under Negotiation: 



Price 



Terms of Payment / Both 



An executive ^ssion has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and Home Depot, regarding a proposed lease. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. ' \ \ y 

B. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 



Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 



I ' 



4. ADJOURNMENT 



\ 



•_ 



A021197.igq 



SAN FRANCISCO 
i PORT COMMISSION 

REGULAR MEETING 

4:00 P.M., FEBRUARY 11, 1997 
FERRY BUILDING, SUITE 3100 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 

AGENDA 

1. ROLL CALL 

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 28, 1997 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Executive Director's Report 

4. LEGISLATIVE 

5. TENANT & MARITIME SERVICES 
) 6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. Approval of Ceremonial Designation of Pier 7 (Broadway and the Embarcadero) as 
the "James Augustino Fishing Pier," at the request of the City and County of San 
Francisco Board of Supervisors. (Resolution No. 97-10) 

B. Status Report on the Ferry Building Renovation Project. 

C. Approval of Amendment to Landing Rights License for Common Carrier Ferry 
Service Landing Slot(s) to provide rental credits for modifications to ramping system 
at Pier Vi. (Resolution No. 97-06) 

D. Guidelines for review and approval of Signs and Murals on Port property. 
(Resolution No. 97-12) 

8. ADMINISTRATION 

A. Approval of 1997/1998 Operating Budget. (Resolution No. 97-09) 
) 9. MARKETING 



A021197.igq 



10. CONSENT CALENDAR 

A. Approval of Travel Authorization for Governmental Affairs Manager, Veronica 
Sanchez, to attend AAPA Spring Legislative Conference in Washington, D.C. on 
March 17-20, 1997. (Resolution No. 97-11) 

11. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

A. Discussion and public comment for the purpose of directing Port staff to develop Port 
policies for naming Port property, including ceremonial and memorial designations. 

12. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT 

1) Confirmation of Appointment of Director of Facilities & Operations 

An executive session to discuss this matter is specifically authorized under 
California Government Code Section 54957. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to an\ non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING 
LITIGATION MATTER: 

1) Discuss existing litigation matter pursuant to subdivision (a) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 

a. Hal-Mar-Jac v. CCSF; San Francisco Superior Court No. 981389. 

D. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 
Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 



A021197.igq 



-2- 



13. ADJOURNMENT 

Public comment is permitted on any matter within Port jurisdiction, and is not limited to agenda 
items. Public comment on non-agenda items mav be raised during New Business/Public 
Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the Commissio n Secretary. 



DISABILITY ACCESS 



The Port Commission office is located on the third floor of the Ferry Building, Suite 3100. The 
Port office is wheelchair accessible. Accessible seating for persons with disabilities (including 
those using wheelchairs) will be available. The closest accessible BART station is Embarcadero 
Station located at Market and Steuart Streets. The closest accessible MUNI Metro station is 
Embarcadero station located at Market and Spear Streets. Accessible MUNI lines serving the 
Ferry Building are the 9, 31, 32 and 71. For more information about MUNI accessible 
services, call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking at the Ferry Building and at the public lot in the Embarcadero 
median in front of the Ferry Building. Assistive listening devices are available for use in the 
Port Commission Meeting. 

The following services are available on request 72 hours prior to the meeting. Please contact 
Kevin Jensen at (415) 274-0555. Late requests will be honored if possible. 

• American Sign Language Interpreters • The use of a reader during the meeting 

• A Sound Enhancement System • Minutes of the Meeting in Alternative 

• Large Print of the Agenda Formats 

In order to assist the City's efforts to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental 
illnesses, multiple chemical sensitivity or related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are 
reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various chemical-based products. Please help 
the City accommodate these individuals. 

Know Your Rights Under the Sunshine Ordinance 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. 
Commissions, boards, councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the 
people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people 
and that City operations are open to the people's review. For more information on your rights 
under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco Administrative Code) or to 
report a violation of the ordinance, contact the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force at 554-485 1 . 



A021197.igq 



■3- 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



MEMORANDUM 

February 5, 1997 




TO: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 
Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Honorable Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James R. Herman 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



FROM: 



SUBJECT: 



N 



Douglas F. Wong pj 
Executive Director 



Approval of Ceremonial Designation .of Pier 7 as the "James Augustino 
Fishing Pier," at the request of the City and County of San Francisco Board 
of Supervisors 



On January 31, 1997, the City and County of San Francisco Board of Supervisors 
approved Resolution 92-97 urging the Mayor to urge the San Francisco Port Commission 
to designate the Pier 7 Public Access and Fishing Pier (Broadway and the Embarcadero) in 
honor of Mr. Jim Augustino. The resolution was introduced by Supervisor Yaki and 
approved without reference to Committee. A copy of the Board Resolution No. 92-97 is 
attached. 

Mr. Augustino, was a former resident of Telegraph Hill and a participant in the Northeast 
Waterfront Committee in the early seventies. Mr. Augustino was a leading advocate in 
proposing that dilapidated cargo piers at Pier 5 and 7 be removed and converted into a 
new public access area that would provide all types of recreational opportunities, including 
recreational fishing. Mr. Augustino frequently used the area for picnics with family and 
friends and as a place to teach his sons to fish. Through Mr. Augustino's vision and 
advocacy, Pier 7 has become one of the Port of San Francisco's most popular waterfront 
destinations for residents and visitors alike. 

The Port Commission has the exclusive authority to name streets and properties under its 
jurisdiction. In response to the City and County of San Francisco Board of Supervisors' 
request, staff recommends the ceremonial designation of Pier 7 as the "James Augustino 
Fishing Pier" to be commonly known as "Augie Pier." For purposes of official 
designation of this facility on maps and documents, Pier 7 will continue to be designated 
as the Pier 7 Public Access and Fishing Pier. Staff will develop an appropriate type and 
design of the ceremonial designation for Pier 7 and bring the matter before the Port 
Commission for its final approval. 

Prepared by: Veronica Sanchez, Manager, Governmental Affairs 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 7 A 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-10 

WHEREAS, On January 31, 1997, the City and Country of San Francisco Board of 
Supervisors unanimously approved Resolution 92-97 urging the 
Mayor to urge the Port Commission to designate the Pier 7 Public 
Access and Fishing Pier (Broadway and the Embarcadero) in honor of 
Mr. James Augustino, an advocate of open space and recreational uses 
for San Francisco's waterfront; and 

WHEREAS, Charter Section B3.581 empowers the Port Commission with the 

power and duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate 
and control the Port area of San Francisco; and 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



RESOLVED, 



RESOLVED, 



RESOLVED, 



The San Francisco Board of Supervisors and the Port Commission 
recognize Mr. Augustino 's contribution for working with the 
community in implementing a plan for converting dilapidated cargo 
piers into spectacular piers supporting open space and recreational 
uses where residents and visitors may enjoy the scenery of the San 
Francisco Bay and gain a better understanding of marine species and 
maritime industries; and 

As envisioned by Mr. Augustino, Pier 7 has become a place where at 
no cost, children may learn to catch and fillet fish; and families may 
picnic together; now, therefore, be it 

That the San Francisco Port Commission approves the ceremonial 
designation of Pier 7 as the "James Augustino Fishing Pier" to be 
commonly known by San Franciscans as "Augie Pier" as a tribute to 
this outstanding San Franciscan in working with the community in 
developing the waterfront for public enjoyment and recreation; and be 
it further 

That this ceremonial designation shall not change the official name of 
Pier 7 on City & County maps and documents; and be it further 

That Port staff is directed to develop the appropriate type and design 
of the ceremonial designation for Pier 7, and to bring the matter 
before the Port Commisson for its final approval. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the San Francisco Port 
Commission at its meeting of February 11, 1997. 



Secretary 



01 M CI 




i 

3 



O. 

o 



03 

rr 
8 

o- 

ft 
o 

o 

3 



S- * 



a. 

o 

3 



> 

y 

5' 



o 

ft 

2. 



" a 



I § 1 

B 2. <8 

_ 52 w 

3 S r 



2. fi. K 



E. 

s 

TO 



8 g- 



E. 
o. 
•a 



2. B 



5 
o' 



f , B 



4 

o 



.' o 



w s 



o 
o 

B 
o 

3" 



K g 



•a 
& 



O O T3 

2 2 5' 

3- §" § 



> 

c 



Q. 

O 
»♦> 

3" 
O 
< 



&• a 



fl 

3- sr 
o 
o 
a. 

o 

I 



5" i 



i i. i 

a 2 » 



5 
o 

H 



p 

3 

ft 

3 

o- 
ft 

o 
ft 

z 



TO C0 

1 £ 

S. 3 



£ 


•a 


"1 


6> 


Kj 


u 


ft 

o 

3 


o 
o 


ft 

3 

O 


n 

o 
3 


B 


< 

EL 


y 

5' 


EP 

o 


o' 


rt 


3 


r/i 


o 


^* 


c? 


T3 




o 


ft 


c 


C/l 




TO 


fl 

■a 


D. 


3" 


3 


2! 








o 





o 


3 


"I 

S- 


H 
ft_ 

ft" 




o. 


TO 




c 


■n 




3 


3" 



2 2 
55 w 



P0 "0 



TO 

I 

O 



3 




PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



February 11, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSFUR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 



Douglas F. Wong 
Executive Director 



of 



SUBJECT: Amendment to Landing Rights License For Common Carrier Ferry Service 
Landing Slot(s) to provide rental credits for modifications to ramping system 
at Pier Vi 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AMENDMENT 

The existing ramp and fender systems at the Pier Vi ferry float need to be modified in order 
to address operational problems. In its current configuration, the existing ramping system 
requires passenger circulation directly on the float deck, which can be hazardous and 
inconvenient during inclement weather. Also, due to variations in vessel design certain ferry 
boats can only land on one side of the float using the current ramping and fendering systems. 
This causes delays and conflicts in scheduling, particularly in the morning and evening peak 
periods. 

In addition, the City of Vallejo is currently constructing two new ferry boats which are 
scheduled to commence service to the existing Pier Vi float in April, 1997. The existing Pier 
Vz ramping and fendering systems will not accommodate the landing of these new vessels 
because of their unusually high freeboard, which measures approximately seven (7) feet. 
The ramping and fendering systems need to be modified to correct these conditions. The 
retrofitted ramp will benefit all common carrier ferry operators and their passengers, 
including the City of Vallejo common carrier ferry service. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM 7£ 



Amendment to Landing Rights License 
February 11, 1997 
Page Two 



All common carrier ferry operators that use the Pier Vi float currently pay landing fees under 
Landing Rights License For Common Carrier Ferry Service Landing Slot(s) ("Landing 
Agreement") between the Port and the operators, which calls for a fee per landing per day 
that declines as the number of daily landings increases (please see Exhibit A for the current 
landing fee schedule). The landing fees are structured to generate enough revenue to the Port 
to pay for the annual maintenance and operating costs of the Pier Vi float. 

For the past three years, the Port has generated an average of $114,000 per year in landing 
fees under the Landing Agreement for Pier Vi . (Please refer to Exhibit B for a breakdown 
of the revenues and expenses at the Pier Vi float for the past three fiscal years). 

To expedite the implementation of the new work to meet the April deadline, the City of 
Vallejo has expressed their willingness to fund the project and contract for the necessary 
design and construction services. The cost of designing and constructing the new ramping 
and fendering systems is estimated to be approximately $140,000. The other common carrier 
ferry service operators (Red and White, Harbor Bay Isle and the City of Alameda) would 
then reimburse the City of Vallejo for a portion of the project cost. 

An amendment to the Landing Agreement has been negotiated with the City of Vallejo and 
the other operators wherein the Port would be responsible for 50% of the actual project cost, 
not to exceed $70,000. The other 50% of the project cost would be borne by the City of 
Vallejo. Under the amended agreement, the Port would suspend the regular landing fees to 
be charged participating operators for common carrier ferry service until the operators have 
been reimbursed for their contribution to the project, for a total credit amount not-to-exceed 
$70,000. The City of Vallejo and the other operators are responsible for any costs in excess of 
the $70,000 limit for rent credits. 

Based on the landing activity levels of the past several years, this will take approximately 7 
months. The regular common carrier ferry service landing fees would resume once the 
operators have utilized the entire credit. During the rent credit period, the Port will pay for the 
maintenance and operating costs of the Pier Vz float from its operating budget. 



Prepared by: Paul Osmundson 
Director, Planning and Development 



I:agd-phal.po.wpd 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-06 

WHEREAS, Under Section B 3.581 of the City Charter, the San Francisco Port Commission ("the 
Commission") has the power and duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain manage, 
regulate and control the Port area of San Francisco; and 

WHEREAS, In their current condition the existing Pier X A ramping and fendering systems do not 
allow all existing and planned ferry vessels to land on either side of the float, and 
require passenger circulation directly on the float deck, which can be hazardous and 
inconvenient during inclement weather; and 

WHEREAS, The City of Vallejo is currently constructing two new ferry boats which are scheduled 
to commence service to the Pier V2 float in April, 1997; arid 

WHEREAS, The existing ramping and fendering systems need to be modified in order to allow 
ferry boats of varying designs to land on either side of the float, to accommodate the 
new Vallejo boats and to improve passenger circulation on the float (the "Project"); 
and 

WHEREAS, To expedite the Project, the City of Vallejo has expressed their willingness to fund the 
Project and contract for the necessary design and construction services, with the other 
common carrier ferry service operators using Pier X A (Red and White, Harbor Bay Isle 
and the City of Alameda) to reimburse Vallejo for a share of the cost of the Project; 
and 

WHEREAS, The cost of designing and constructing the Project is estimated to be approximately 
$140,000; and 

WHEREAS, The Port desires to reimburse the operators for a portion of costs incurred on the 
project by applying rent credits to the Pier 14 north float common carrier ferry service 
landing fees for actual contributions made by each operator to the cost of the Project, 
with the Port responsible for 50% of the actual cost of the project for a total amount 
not-to-exceed $70,000; now, therefore be it 

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby authorizes the Executive Director or 
his designee to execute an amendment to the Landing Rights License For Common 
Carrier Ferry Service Landing Slot(s) in a form approved by the City Attorney to apply 
rent credits, in an amount not-to-exceed $70,000, to the Pier Vi north float common 
carrier ferry service landing fees, in order to facilitate the construction of the Project; 
and be it further 

RESOLVED, that the City of Vallejo and the other ferry operators are responsible for any costs in 
excess of the $70,000 limit for rent credits. 

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its meeting of 
February 11, 1997. 



Secretary 



I:agd-phal.po.wpd 



EXHIBIT A 



Landing Fee Schedule 



Pier 1/2 



Landing 

Number 

1st Landing of the day 

2nd " 
3rd " 
4th 

5th " 
6th " 
7th ;i 
8th 
9 or more 



Price 

(Ter Landing Per Dav^i 

$19.25 
15.40 
13.48 
11.55 
9.63 
7.70 
5.78 
3.85 
1.93 



H Exhibit lie upd 



CO 


OC 




o 


»w 


t*» 


zz 




o 


OC 


< 


— 


— , 




o 




=0 








s^ 












a 


r- 


vo 




CN 


in 






in 


*■« 


CN 


cn 









CN 


m — 




CN O 


CN 


— o cn vo 


m vo tj- 


moo 


VO^ 


o co rt ' m CG L 


VO — CN 


— o o 


m 


"1 ^ in" CN* 


CN CN 00 


— o" "1 


vo n >n cn 


m" m" oc" 


— — >^- 


— 



o 




cn o 


VO 


— c o 


cn cn -a- 


moo 




o o o 


CM — vo 


— O^ o 


m 


""■„ c „ o* 


r*^ m cn : 


— o" *1 


_" 


vo n m 


m" m" vo" • 


— — rj- 


CN 



) 



CO 


o 






a 


in 






~* 


VO 


CJ 

< 


CN 


— 




u 




Cfl 




TS 




3 




a 


OC 

CN 


m 


oc 


cn 


NO* 


^ 


o 


CN 


— 



cn 




«n 


VO 


f c ^ 


CN vo o 


o — o o 


r- 


(N C (N 


CN — CN 


^r oe vo o 


°°« 


CN CO __" 


vq cn c 


°° o" ^ -. 


r-~ 


<n" m" tj- 


m" m" t* 


in — in -<3- 


CO 









rr 


c 




»n vo 


■^r 


rr o vo r- 


o o 


O — "3- O 


vo - 


CN O O VO 


O vo 


tt oo in o 


o" 

o 


cn c -^r \q 


— -<r 


°= o ~ ~ 


m" m" vo" cn 


cn m" 


in *— m «ct- 


— 



> 







— 




CN 






2 




^T 


























CJ 

< 




vo" 

CN 






— 










u 










Cfl 










"3 


















v. 

CJ 


/«n 




m 










m^ 


co 






TT 


cz 


g; 


TT 




O 


.5 


a 


CN 




o" 


j; 




m 




c 


,5 


CN 




^~ 


r™ 


w 








>» 


cc 


















CJ 


CJ 








r- 




















_ 


CJ 

> 

CJ 






co 


"^ 




a 


cj 

,CJ 


z 




Z 


Cfl 


^ 






r-^ 












' , 


— rf 




> 


w 


CJ 






(■-•> 














Z- 


< 




e£ 


^.^ 







m 


— 


c 


CN 


in 


Ci 


c 


r^ 


w 


TT 


m" 


r~, 


CN 













O 






— 


C 


VO 


P^ 






in 


o 


o 


in 






r*^ 


: ,'• 


■^ 


vo* 






m" 


r: 


vo" 

CJ 

u 


CN 

O 








^ 


r- 


CJ 








^; 


5 


cz 








^ 


u 


C3 


CO 






Tj 


u 


53 


r» ' 


_CJ 


>> 


CJ 


.s 




C/2 
















CJ 


y; 






z 


7. 

o 


/" \ 


o 


2 

CJ 


Cd 

2 


X 


1 




> 


2 


-2 



CM OO 
rr CN 
t*\ CN 

m m" 



c o 

O vo 

— 'T 

cn m" 



a 



J D 



ca — 

CCS 'C 



O vo 

O O "^- o 

r^ in in o 

^ o" - ~ 

m — m rr 



o r-> 

o o cn o 

r** m vo o 

^ o" o" ~ 

*n ~ m T 



CO 
CO — 

E u 

C5 ^v- CJ 

o — o 



.^i i— 



o = 

3 O 

is « 

£ •- 



:= P O 



a 

o _ 

CO Q. -> 



00 
vo" 



oo" 

CN 



C O 
VO — 
m r" x 

— " c" 
m m 

G 

Li 

r 

c— 
U 



o 




u 




a 


CO 


D 


CO 


Z 


Z 


ll: 




> 


c_ 


r»> 


X 


<N»< 


r . X 


^^ 


"^ 


1 


■» 






< 


< 


H 


j— 


C 





PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

TeieDhone 415 274 CAOO 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 052= 

Cable SFPORTCCMM 

Writer 



TO: 



FROM: 



February 11, 1997 

MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 
Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 



Douglas F. Wong 
Executive Director 



-3 



\t 



SUBJECT: Guidelines for Review and Approval of Signs and Murals on Port Property 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Approve Guidelines for Review and Approval of 
Signs and Murals on Port property. 

Background 

The Port receives permit applications for signs and murals on Port property. In the past. Port 
staff has reviewed and approved signs and murals as part of the Port building permit approval 
process, utilizing an informal set of guidelines. However, the Port Commission had never 
formally adopted sign guidelines. 

Port staff believes that the Port Commission should now formally adopt guidelines for review 
and approval of signs. The attached Guidelines have been prepared to specifically address the 
evaluation of the design of signs and murals on Port property. These Guidelines will assist the 
Port staff in evaluating applications for sign permits as part of the building permit review 
process. Staff may recommend further design review by outside design advisors if the 
proposed sign has significant implications for the urban design of the waterfront. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 7D 



The Port Commission has approved the preparation of an Urban Design/Public Access Plan 
that will be incorporated as part of the Waterfront Plan. This work is now underway with the 
involvement of a Technical Advisory Committee, with representatives from civic, 
environmental, and professional design groups and regulatory agencies. 

The Urban Design/Public Access Plan lays out concepts and principles that address the urban 
design, public access and historic resources throughout Port property. The Design Plan is the 
implementing tool to express design goals and define characteristics and parameters for 
structures and public improvements. The attached guidelines are consistent with the Urban 
Design Public Access Plan. 



Prepared by: Paul Osmundson 
Director, Planning and Development 



< 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
RESOLUTION NO. 97-12 



WHEREAS, under Section B3.581 of the City Charter the San Francisco Port Commission 
has the power and duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and 
control the Port area of San Francisco; and 

WHEREAS, signs and murals on Port property have a high visual impact on the overall 
quality of the urban design of the waterfront; and 

WHEREAS, in the past the Port staff has reviewed and approved signs and murals as part of 
the Port building permit approval process, utilizing an informal set of 
guidelines; and 

WHEREAS, the Port Commission desires to formally adopt written guidelines for the review 
and approval of signs and murals (the guidelines are attached to this resolution): 
and 

WHEREAS, the Port is preparing an urban design and public access plan that will address 
design, public access and historic resource issues throughout Port property and 
the attached guidelines are consistent with the urban design plan: now therefore 
be it 

RESOLVED, the Port Commission hereby adopts the Guidelines for Signs and Murals on 
Port property as set forth in the Attachment hereto; and be it further. 



RESOLVED, that the Port Commission hereby authorizes the Executive Director or his 
designee to approve signs and murals located on Port property on behalf of 
the Port, subject to conformance with the Guidelines for Signs and Murals. 



I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of February 11, 1997. 



Secretary 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 

GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW 

AND APPROVAL OF SIGNS & MURALS 

I. Application of Guidelines and Exemptions 

A. Port Sign Committee Review and Approval. No person shall place or erect 
any sign or mural that is subject to these Guidelines on projects within Port 
jurisdiction without first obtaining review and approval by the Port Sign 
Committee in accordance with these Guidelines. The Port Sign Committee 
shall be comprised of Port staff with expertise and experience in architecture, 
urban design, landscape architecture, planning, commercial property 
management or other similar backgrounds. 

B. Application . Except as specifically exempted in Section I. C. hereof, these 
Guidelines shall apply to all permanent and temporary signs installed on 
property within Port jurisdiction which are visible from public streets, 
sidewalks, waterways, or from the air including interior signs designed or 
arranged to be primarily visible from the outside of any building or structures. 

C. Exemptions . These Guidelines shall not apply to the following: 

1. Legally required posters, notices or signs. 

2. International, national, state, city, county (or other political 
subdivision), or maritime house flags. 

3. Port or City signs, or State-installed traffic or directional signs. 

II. Permit Submittal and Review Process. 

A. The following procedures shall be applicable for the review of all proposed 
signs that are subject to these Guidelines: 

1 . Applications for Port Sign Committee review shall be submitted on 
Port Building Permit Application Forms and shall include detailed 
specifications and drawings as follows: 

a. Building Site Plan, drawn to scale, and showing: 

(1) Location of proposed sign. 

(2) Location of existing landscaping. 



-1- 



(3) Location of existing adjacent signs and other signs in 
the vicinity of the premises that are to remain in place. 

b. Exterior elevation drawings, drawn to scale, of the building, 
structure, or principal open space features, showing location 
of existing adjacent signs to remain and the proposed sign. 

c. Details of sign, drawn to scale, which include: 

(1) Sign dimensions. 

(2) Plan view. 

(3) Elevation view. 

(4) Colors. A sample of each proposed color to be used 
must be submitted for review and approval. 

(5) Materials. Material samples may be required. 

(6) Letter size and type style. 

(7) Lighting or illumination. 

(8) Content of sign including exact wording and other 
design features. 

(9) Name, address and telephone number of manufacturer 
as well as manufacturer's specifications. 

(10) All structural details, which shall comply with the San 
Francisco Building Code. 

(11) All electrical details, which shall comply with the San 
Francisco Electrical Code. Provide UL Labels where 
applicable. 

d. Photograph of the building, structure or open space features, 
marked to show proposed sign location. 

e. The application fees required shall be as listed in the San 
Francisco Building Code. 

After receipt of a completed application, together with all supporting 
documentation, the Port Sign Committee shall review the application in 
accordance with the Port's urban design guidelines and public access plan 
which are currently being developed (and available in draft form), and also 
in accordance with the following considerations: 

a. The design of a sign shall be integrated with the architectural 
design of the building or site. 



b. Adjoining and surrounding improvements shall be equally 
considered, taking into consideration the architectural 
character of any adjoining improvements and existing views or 
view corridors. 

c. Signs shall be consistent with the character of the Port 
waterfront setting or neighborhood location. 

3. The Port Sign Committee, upon review of an application, may 
approve, conditionally approve, or deny such application based on 
consistency of the sign with the criteria set forth in Section II. A. 2 
hereof. 

a. In those instances where the Port Sign Committee has denied 
an Application, the Committee shall inform the applicant, in 
writing, why the application has been denied based on the 
criteria set forth in Section II. A. 2. The denial shall be issued 
within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of an application. 

b. The applicant may resubmit a revised application addressing 
the deficiencies which led to the denial of the application or 
may appeal the Port Sign Committee's decision to the Port 
Executive Director or his/her Designee. The appeal must be 
in writing and must state the reasons why the application 
should be approved. The determination of the Director or 
his/her Designee shall be final and shall be made within fifteen 
(15) business days of receipt of the written appeal. 

4. The Port Sign Committee may recommend review by the Port's 
Design Review Committee, if it determines that the sign may have 
significant implications for the urban design of the waterfront setting. 
The review is coordinated by the Port's Planning and Development 
Division. 

III. Temporary Signs and Banners . In addition to the permanent signage permitted 
herein, tenants or licensees may be permitted up to two temporary signs as described 
below. Except as provided in sections C and D below, temporary signs will be 
permitted for a two-week period, with additional two-week extensions possible to a 
maximum of 8 weeks. Each extension will require additional approval by the Port 
Sign Committee. 

A. Signs Noticing Public Events which are removed immediately after the event 
has taken place. 



B. Signs in Anticipation of Permanent Signs for businesses which are open to the 
public prior to delivery of a permanent sign. 

C. Real Estate Signs no larger than 16 square feet in area that are displayed for 
a limited period of time. The duration of display must be specified in the 
permit but will be individually determined in accordance with the project's 
needs. Up to two (2) real estate signs are allowed per leasehold. 

D. Construction Signs. Construction signs for construction projects stating the 
names and addresses of those individuals or firms directly connected with the 
design or construction project and/or the name of the owner, the leasing agent 
and/or ultimate user. Construction signs are limited to 32 square feet in area 
and one sign per street frontage. 

IV. Murals. Murals or extensive paint treatments applied or affixed to the exterior of a 
building or lease premise shall require a Port permit. 

The Port Sign Committee may recommend that the design be reviewed by the Porf s 
Design Advisors (See Section II. 4.) 

V. Prohibited Signs and Advertising. The following signs and advertising are prohibited 
on Port property: 

A. Portable signs, such as sandwich boards, except signs for intermittent parking 
uses, (e.g. valet parking signs). 

B. Wind signs, revolving signs, reflecting signs, blinking signs, balloon signs 
and other tethered signs. 



ie-i 



C. General Advertising Signs. General advertising signs not directly advertising 
the business or person located at or on the premises on which the sign is 
proposed shall not be permitted on Port property, unless authorized by me 
Port Executive Director. 

VI. Signage Restrictions. 

A. Sign Area 

1. Except as provided otherwise herein, the total area of signs shall be 
limited to one square foot for each linear foot of street frontage for 
each street frontage. 



B. Sign Height. 



1 . Signs affixed to buildings . The maximum height of a sign affixed to 
a building shall be the eaveline of the building to which it is affixed. 
In a multiple-use building (such as a building with ground level retail 
and office uses above) the signage shall not extend above or below the 
level of the signed use. 



'c 1 



2. Free-standing signs . Free-standing signs shall be limited in height to 
ten feet above the grade, measured at the horizontal center line of the 
sign. 

C. Sign Projection from the face of the building. 

1 . Signs attached to buildings or structures shall project out from the face 
of the building no more than two inches when the lowest part of the 
sign is seven feet or less above the grade directly below the sign and 
no more than six inches when the lowest part of the sign is more than 
seven feet above the grade directly below the sign. 

D. Total Number of Signs. 

1 . No more than two signs per single-tenant building will be permitted. 
No more than one sign per tenant in a multiple-use building will be 
permitted. If a single-tenant building has a frontage on more than one 
street an additional sign to the two allowed on the main frontage may 
be permitted on each additional street frontage. In a multi-tenant 
building, the Port Sign Committee may recommend guidelines for the 
design and placement of a building directory. 

E. Sign Location. 

1. Except as provided in VI. E. 4. below, all tenant signs shall be placed 
within the boundaries of the leased or licensed space. 

2. When feasible, tenant signs should be affixed to buildings or 
structures. 

3. Signs will not be permitted on or over public sidewalks or any other 
public passage areas, unless the owner has received a sidewalk 
encroachment permit or similar agreement from the Port, and such 
signs are characteristic of the neighborhood or area, as determined by 
the Port Sign Committee. 



* 



i 



i 



4. Off-site signage may be permitted only in the case of a business that 
has no street frontage. 

F. Illumination. 

1. Use of high-intensity, unshielded or undiffused lights shall not be 
permitted. Lights shall be shielded or diffused so as to eliminate glare 
and annoyance. 

2. No electrical or illuminated sign shall blink or be intermittently 
lighted. 

VII. Maintenance: Removal of Signs. 

A. The owner of any sign shall maintain the sign in a sound and safe condition 
and so that the sign does not become unsightly. The Port Sign Committee, 
upon notice, may revoke the permit for any sign which is not so maintained. 

B. A sign which no longer serves the purpose or the establishment for which the 
sign was originally permitted must be removed by the sign owner and the 
removal area restored to the original condition prior to the installation of the 
sign. This must be done within 15 days after the discontinuance or 
abandonment of the use or premises. 

VIII. Abatement of Non-Conforming Signs. 

A. Any sign in Port jurisdiction which does not conform to these Guidelines or 
which is erected without Port Sign Committee review and a Port Building 
Permit or is hereafter erected or constructed in violation of the requirements 
of these Guidelines shall be considered a non-conforming sign. 

B. The Port may declare any non-conforming sign to be a public nuisance and 
may require the sign owner to remove the sign upon notification by the Port. 
If not removed as requested, the Port may remove the non-conforming sign 
at the sign-owner's expense. 

IX. Variance Procedure. 

A. Applications for variances from these Guidelines shall be made in writing to 
the Port Sign Committee. The Applicant shall submit a detailed explanation 
why the specific guideline challenged should not apply. 



« 



i 



B. To grant a variance, the Port Sign Committee must make all of the following 
findings: 

1 . The proposed sign will be in harmony with the general purpose and 
intent of these Guidelines; and 

2. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to 
the sign application involved that do not apply generally to other 
similar uses or property; and 

3. That owing to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, the literal 
enforcement of specific provisions of these Guidelines would result in 
practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship not created by or 
attributable to the applicant. 

C. In those instances where the Port Sign Committee has denied a Variance 
Application, the Committee shall inform the Applicant, in writing, why the 
Application has been denied, within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of a 
variance application. 

D. The Applicant may resubmit a revised application addressing deficiencies 
which lead to the denial of the variance, or may appeal the Port Sign 
Committee's decision to the Port Executive Director or his/her Designee. 
The appeal must be in writing and must state the reasons why the variance 
should be approved. The determination of the Director or his/her Designee 
shall be final, and shall be made within fifteen (15) business days of receipt 
of a revised application. 



X. Penalties. 



No sign shall be placed, erected or constructed without first obtaining a Port 
Sign Committee approval and a building permit from the Port. Any sign 
installed at a site or building within Port jurisdiction for which approval and 
a Permit have not first been obtained shall constitute a violation of the San 
Francisco Building Code as described in Section 205 therein. Penalties for 
any such violation shall be as provided in Section 205 as amended from time 
to time. 



H:\agd97-2.wpd\fj 



-7- 



< 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



February 11, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 
Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 



FROM: Douglas F. Wong ^J!\} 

Executive Director 

SUBJECT: FY 1997/98 Operating Budget 



The proposed FY 1997/98 Operating Budget is summarized as follows: 





1996/97 


1997/98 


Decrease 


Eeiceni 


Revenue 


$33,944,921 


$35,100,712 


$1,155,791 


3.4% 


Expense 


33.271,177 


34.480.250 


1,209.073. 


3.6% 


Surplus 


$ 673,744 


$ 620,462 


$(53,282) 


(7.9%) 



This reflects recent revisions to the draft budget described in more detail below. The 
accompanying budget summary and detailed budget books do not reflect these revisions. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 8A 



Reorganization 

Incorporated into the fiscal 1997/98 budget is a reorganization of departments. The 

proposed changes are as follows: 

• Maritime Division 

A separate Maritime Division is included in the FY 97/98 budget. This Division will 
be responsible for promoting Port cargo facilities and for managing cargo terminal 
operations and other harbor services. A Division Director will be responsible for 
managing the Maritime Division. 

• Real Estate & Asset Management 

The title of this division, formally known as Tenant & Maritime Services, has been 
changed. As described above, Maritime is now a separate division. Functions 
transferred to Maritime from this division include harbor service, performed by Port 
Wharfingers. 

• Marketing 

Cargo marketing has been transferred from the Marketing Division to the Maritime 
Division. 

• Finance & Administration 

The title of this division, formally known as Administration, has been changed. In 
addition, responsibility for two storekeepers located at the Port's maintenance facility 
and supporting the maintenance staff, has been transferred from Finance & 
Administration to Facilities & Operations. 

Reyenue 

The proposed revenue budget of $35. 1 million for FY 97/98 is a $1.2 million increase 

(3.4%) over the prior fiscal year. Revenues for FY 97/98 are as follows: 









Increase/ 






1996/97 


1997/98 


Decrease 


Percent 


Cargo 


$1,221,500 


$1,779,000 


$557,500 


46% 


Harbor Services 


630,700 


700,000 


69,300 


11% 


Ship Repair 


1,540,000 


987,000 


(553,000) 


(36%) 


Commercial/Industrial 


22,122,000 


22,577,000 


455,000 


2% 


Parking 


3,555,300 


3,424,000 


(131,300) 


(4%) 


Cruise 


509,200 


725,700 


216,500 


43% 


Fishing 


1,211,700 


1,251,600 


39,900 


3% 


Other Marine 


448,400 


549,000 


100,600 


22% 


Power 


723,300 


719,000 


(4,300) 


(1%) 


Miscellaneous 


95,000 


50,000 


(45,000) 


(47%) 


Marketing 


200,000 


625,000 


425,000 


213% 


Facilities & Operations 


170,000 


170,000 





0% 


Administration 


1,517,821 


1,543,412 


25.591 


2%. 


Total 


$33,944,921 


$35,100,712 


$1,155,791 


3% 



The major changes in the FY 97/98 revenue budget over the prior fiscal year are in cargo, 
ship repair, commercial and industrial rent, cruise and marketing revenue as follows: 

• cargo revenue is projected to increase $557,500 (46%) due to the recently signed 
agreements with Serpac and Madrigal Wan Hai; 

• ship repair revenue is projected to fall $553,000 (-36%) primarily due to the closure 
of the Service Engineering Company shipyard at Pier 50; 

• commercial and industrial rent is projected to increase $455,000 (2%) primarily due to 
rent from percentage leases that are projected to grow from increased tenant sales; 

• cruise revenue is projected to increase 216,500 (43%) primarily due to increased 
passenger volume associated with larger vessel capacity; and 

• marketing revenue is projected to increase $425,000 (213%) due to increased filming 
and special event revenue. 

Revenue for a three year period is as follows: 



Revenue 
FY 95/96-FY 97/98 

(In Millions) 




95/96 



96/97* 



97/98* 



I Commercial D All Others B 
Budget 




Expense 

The proposed expense budget of $34.5 million for FY 97/98 is a $1.2 million increase 
(3.6%) over the prior fiscal year. Expense for FY 97/98 is as follows: 









Increase/ 






1996/97 


1997/98 


Decrease 


Eercenl 


Salaries & Fringe 


$14,558,940 


$15,439,413 


$880,473 


6% 


City Wide Overhead 


319,164 


500,000 


180,836 


57% 


Other Current Expenses 


3,467,791 


4,010,767 


542,976 


16% 


Materials & Supplies 


1,073,554 


1,153,517 


79,963 


7% 


Fixed Charges 


258,700 


290,115 


31,415 


12% 


Capital Outlay 


274,103 


205,752 


(68,351) 


(25%) 


Facilities Maintenance 


290,700 


357,000 


66,300 


23% 


Debt Service 


7,873,541 


7,411,841 


(461,700) 


(6%) 


Insurance 


800,000 


600,000 


(200,000) 


(25%) 


City Attorney 


923,100 


1,076,800 


153,700 


17% 


Fire Protection 


1,165,015 


1,195,300 


30,285 


3% 


Workers Comp 


375,000 


325,000 


(50,000) 


(13%) 


Light, Heat & Power 


520,000 


470,000 


(50,000) 


(10%) 


All Other Depts 


1,125,569 


1,194,745 


69,176 


6% 


Revenue Transfer - DPT 


246 r 000 


250.000 


4,000 


2%. 


Total 


$33,271,177 


$34,480,250 


$1,209,073 


4% 



The major changes in the FY 97/98 expense budget over the prior fiscal year are in 
personnel, other current expenses, debt service and services of other departments 
(insurance and City Attorney) as follows: 

• personnel costs are projected to increase $880,473 (6%) as a result of: 

scheduled salary and step increases ($ 1 8 1 , 1 45) ; 

anticipated wage increases not yet negotiated, a 2% increase ($230,600); 

3 new positions ($148,872); 

7 reclassified positions ($39,600); 

2 funded positions that were previously unfunded ($110,300); 

temporary salaries ($145,353); and 

fringe benefits ($24,603); 

• other current expenses are projected to increase $542,976 (16%) primarily due to 
increased professional services expense expected from a new janitorial contract and the 
transfer of expense for professional auditors that was previously budgeted in Services 
of Other Departments; 

• debt service expense is projected to fall $461,700 (-6%) based on the current debt 
repayment schedule; 

• services of other departments are projected to change significantly from the previous 

4 



fiscal year in the following areas: 

• insurance expense is projected to fall $200,000 (-25%) due to the renewal of 
insurance premiums at lower cost; and 

• City Attorney expense is projected to increase $153,700 (17%) due to the 
assignment of one additional attorney to the Port. 

Expense for a three year period is as follows: 



Expense 
FY 95/96 - FY 97/98 



$20 pKWSWKWxWxW 



(In Millions) 




95/96 



96/97' 



97/98* 



'■:■■■•■ .■••■ .:' 



■ Personnel M Debt O Other Depts ■ Current Exp Q AH Others 
* Budget 



Revisions to Draft Budget 

The recommended budget for FY 97/98 includes revisions from the budget as described in 
the summary and detail budget books, provided to the Commission in December 1996. 
These revisions are described below: 



Salaries & Fringe Benefits 
Facilities Maintenance 
Services of Other Departments 
Total Revision 



Draft 


Revised 




Budget 


Budget 


Variance 


$15,481,475 


$15,439,413 


$(42,062) 


307,000 


357,000 


50,000 


4.925.663 


4.861.845 


(63.818) 


$20,714,138 


$20,658,258 


$(55,880) 



Revisions to the FY 97/98 expense budget include: 

• Salaries and Fringe Benefit savings of $42,062 as a result of: 

• an increase of $3, 166 to upgrade the Maritime Director position from Maritime 
Manager; 

• a savings of $33,578 from deleting the new Executive Secretary n position; 

• a savings of $55,985 from deleting the new Marketing Project Coordinator 
position; 

• a savings of $60,865 from deleting the new Sheetmetal Worker position; 

• an increase of $92,000 from adding a temporary Deputy Zoning Administrator 
which is offset by a $110,000 reduction in the City Planning budget; 

• an increase of $13,200 from adding a temporary summer intern position; 

• Facilities Maintenance increase of $50,000 for the Fisherman's Wharf Environmental 
Quality Advisory Committee to develop an environmental quality plan and 
recommendations; 

• Services of Other Department savings of $63,818 as a result of: 

• an increase of $50,000 for additional City Attorney time assigned to the Port; and 

• a savings of $113,818 in City Planning offset by the transfer of this expense to 
temporary salaries. 

Staff requests the Commission to authorize the Executive Director to make non-material 
changes to the annual operating budget as may be necessary. For example, the proposed 
budget contains anticipated salary increases not yet determined. As labor agreements are 
negotiated, budgeted salary and fringe benefits estimates will be updated. Similarly, 
anticipated expenses for Services of Other Departments contained in the budget are 
preliminary estimates. These estimates may be revised as information is received from the 
Departments delivering the requested services. 

Staff will return to the Commission for approval of any material revisions to the budget 
that may be necessary subsequent to this approval. 



Prepared by: Benjamin A. Kutnick 



I 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 97-09 



WHEREAS, 

WHEREAS, 

WHEREAS, 

WHEREAS, 

WHEREAS, 
WHEREAS, 

RESOLVED, 

RESOLVED, 



staff has developed an operating budget including organizational 
changes; and 

the operating budget includes projected revenues of 
$35,100,712; and 

the operating budget includes projected expenses of 
$34,480,250; and 

the operating budget includes projected surplus of 
$620,462; and 

the operating budget includes a Maritime Division; and 

the operating budget must also be approved by the Mayor and the 
Board of Supervisors; therefore, be it 

that the Port Commission approves the fiscal year 1997/98 
operating budget as presented by staff; and be it further 

that the Port Commission authorizes the Executive Director to 
make non-materials changes to the annual operating budget as 
may be necessary. 



I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of February 11, 1997. 



Secretary 



MEMORANDUM 



February 4, 1997 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



TO: 



FROM: 
SUBJECT: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. James R. Herman 



Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 



. y jv 




Ferry Building 
San Francisco, CA 94111 
Telephone 415 274 0400 
Telex 275940 PSF UR 
Fax 415 274 0528 
Cable SFPORTCOMM 

DdlfifiMENTS DEPT. 

FEB 6 1997 

SAN FRANCISCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 



Approval of Travel Authorization for Governmental Affairs Manager, Ms. 
Veronica Sanchez, to attend AAPA Spring Legislative Conference in 
Washington, D.C. (March 17-20, 1997) 



From March 1 7-20, 1 997, the American Association of Port Authorities will hold its Spring 
Conference in Washington, D.C. to discuss pending legislative proposals. This Conference is well 
attended by Port Directors and senior managers. 

Ms. Veronica Sanchez, Governmental Affairs Manager, has been asked to attend the 
conference to attend the meeting of the Legislative Policy Council, comprised of Port Directors from 
all parts of the country, regarding legislative proposals for changing the Passenger Services Act 
(PSA). Ms. Sanchez is taking a lead with other ports and tourism organizations in preparing 
legislation and organizing the support that will lead to creation of new cruise opportunities for the 
Port of San Francisco. The Legislative Policy Council's review and endorsement of proposed 
legislation is needed to secu re AAPA's support and resources in lobbying for passage of the bill. 

Ms. Sanchez will also seize this opportunity to meet with Congressional staff and 
administration representatives on the proposed PSA legislation and other projects of importance to 
the Port. 

The estimated costs of the trip are: 

Airfare to Washington Dulles Airport $382.82 

Conference Registration 250.00 

Hotel (3 nights at of $ 1 70/night, incls taxes) 376.50 

Transportation 150.00 

Meals 80.00 

Telephone/Faxes 50.00 

Total $1289.32 

Funds for this trip are available in the Port's Fiscal Year 96-97 budget. 

Prepared by: Veronica Sanchez, Manager, Governmental Affairs 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 10A 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 97-11 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
FEB 6 1997 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 
RESOLVED, 



The Executive Director is requesting authorization for one Port 
Representative to Attend the Spring Conference of the American 
Association of Port Authorities, Washington, D.C. (March 17-20, 
1997) in accordance with the Fiscal Year 1996-1997 budget for 
the purpose of representing the Port at discussions before the 
Legislative Policy Council related to proposed legislation to open 
up new markets for the Port's cruise business in domestic 
itineraries; and 

The cost of this trip has been included in the Port Commission's 
Fiscal year 1996-1997 budget; now, therefore, be it 

that the Port Commission hereby approves this travel request. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the San Francisco Port 
Commission at its meeting of February 11, 1997. 



Secretary 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



FEBRUARY 11, 1997 

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

HON. MICHAEL HARDEMAN, PRESIDENT 
HON. DENISE McCARTHY, VICE PRESIDENT 
HON. FRANKIE G. LEE 
HON. PRESTON COOK 
HON. JAMES HERMAN 



DOUGLAS F. WONG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
OCT C 8 1S29 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING 

FEBRUARY 11, 1997 

1. ROLL CALL 

The meeting was called to order by Commission President Michael Hardeman at 
2:05 p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Michael Hardeman, Denise 
McCarthy, Frankie Lee, Preston Cook and James Herman. 

2. NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC COMMENT 

Mr. Patrick Kelly, lessee of one of the warehouses in Illinois Street, indicated that 
he or the Friends of Islais Creek organization have not been informed about the 
Home Depot situation at Pier 80. He was seeking out information and would like 
to be included for input in the process. Commissioner Hardeman replied that the 
Commission will be taking a tour of Pier 80 today and requested the Executive 
Director to have someone from his staff provide Mr. Kelly information that can be 
legally shared. 



3. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

At 2:09 p.m., the Commission Secretary announced that the Commission will 
withdraw to executive session to discuss the following: 

A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Pier 80 

Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*Home Depot Representative: Jim Lyon, Real Estate Manager, Western Region 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and Home Depot, regarding a proposed lease. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

B. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 
Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 



A021197.igq 



At 4:06 p.m., Commissioners Hardeman, McCarthy, Lee and Cook returned from 
executive session and convened in public session. Commissioner Hardeman indicated 
that Commissioner Herman asked to be excused at the conclusion of the executive 
session. 

Commissioner McCarthy stated that the Commission met with the Port representative 
only regarding the Home Depot real estate negotiations for Pier 80. The Commission 
also took a site visit and reviewed certain aspects of the negotiations. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval to not disclose any information 
discussed in the executive session. Commissioner Lee seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor. 



The meeting was adjourned at 4:08 p.m. 



A021197.igq -2- 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



FEBRUARY 11, 1997 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

HON. MICHAEL HARDEMAN, PRESIDENT 
HON. DENISE McCARTHY, VICE PRESIDENT 
HON. FRANKIE G. LEE 
HON. PRESTON COOK 
HON. JAMES HERMAN 



DOUGLAS F. WONG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 

FEBRUARY 11, 1997 



1. ROLL CALL 

The meeting was called to order by Commission President Michael Hardeman at 4:10 
p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Michael Hardeman, Denise McCarthy, 
Frankie Lee and Preston Cook. Commissioner Herman was excused. 

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 28, 1997 

Commissioner Cook requested amending the minutes to reflect the correct number of new 
Port tenants last year. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval as amended; Commissioner Lee 

seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the minutes 
of the meeting, as amended, were adopted. 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. The Executive Director reported the following: 

1) On Friday, February 7, 1997, an estimated 6,000 to 10,000 people attended the 
Herb Caen Candlelight Walk. More than 15 Port tenants participated and they 
had extremely good turn out that evening. Everything went well; there were no 
reported incidents. Carolyn Macmillan handled the media relations for the Herb 
Caen Memorial Service and he commended her for a job well done. 

2) On Thursday, March 6, 1997 at 1:00 p.m., a joint Commission meeting with the 
BCDC and Port to discuss the Draft Concept Agreement between the Port, BCDC 
and Save the Bay Association will be held in the Cruise Terminal at Pier 35. Port 
staff will accompany the BCDC Commission to a tour of Piers 46, 48 and 80 and 
possibly Pier 94/96 at 11:00 a.m. that same day. He encouraged the Commission 
to attend the meeting. 

3) Mr. Wong welcomed back Commissioner McCarthy who attended the Special 
Seminar for members of the Port Authority Governing Boards and Commissions, 
sponsored by the American Association of Port Authorities in Palm Beach, 
Florida. Handouts from the conference were given to the Commissioners for 
their information. 



M021197.igq 



Commissioner McCarthy stated that she was pleased to attend the conference. 
The conference was extremely informative and insightful. There were a range of 
issues presented from legal liabilities of the Port Governing Boards and 
Commissions to an excellent presentation on International trade and the future of 
shipping. She encouraged the other Commissioners to take advantage of 
upcoming meetings. 

4. LEGISLATIVE 

5. TENANT & MARITIME SERVICES 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. A pproval of Ceremonial Designation of Pier 7 (Broadway and the Embarcadero) as 
the "James Augustino Fishing Pier." at the request of the City and County of San 
Francisco Board of Supervisors. (Resolution No. 97-lCft 

Veronica Sanchez, Manager of Governmental Affairs, stated that the San Francisco 
Board of Supervisors approved Resolution 92-97 urging the Mayor to urge the Port 
Commission to designate the Pier 7 Public Access and Fishing Pier in honor of Mr. 
Augustino. Mr. Augustino was a former resident of Telegraph Hill. Mr. Augustino 
was a leading advocate in proposing that dilapidated cargo piers at Piers 5 and 7 be 
removed and converted into a new public access area that would provide all types of 
recreational opportunities. Mr. Augustino used the area for picnics with family and 
friends and as a place to teach his sons to fish. Through Mr. Augustino 's vision and 
advocacy, Pier 7 has become one of the Port's most popular waterfront destinations 
for residents and visitors alike. Staff recommends the ceremonial designation of Pier 
7 as the "James Augustino Fishing Pier" to be commonly known as "Augie Pier." 
Pier 7 will continue to be designated as the Pier 7 Public Access and Fishing Pier on 
official maps and documents. Staff will develop an appropriate type and design of the 
ceremonial designation for Pier 7 and will be brought to the Commission for its final 
approval. 

Dennis Henmi stated that Mr. Augustino contributed a lot to the community and urged 
the Commission to adopt the resolution. Chris Martin stated that Mr. Augustino was 
a good friend and was a person who made an impact in the community and believes 
that it's only appropriate that Pier 7 be named in his honor. 

Betty Landis, member of the Open Space Committee, supports the Board of 
Supervisors resolution of naming the pier in honor of Mr. Augustino. She, however, 
requested the Commission to have Pier 7 maintained as the lighting fixtures at the pier 
are rusty. 

Theresa Rea spoke on behalf of the resolution as a close friend of Mr. Augustino and 
as a member of the Mid-Embarcadero Open Space committee. She shared with the 

M021197.igq -2- 



Commission a photograph found in Mr. Augustino's office signed by former Mayor 
Art Agnos. 

Anne Halsted, former Port Commissioner, stated that if there's any question in 
anybody's mind to name the pier in honor of Mr. Augustino, that it be removed. The 
idea of restoring Pier 7 was Mr. Augustino's idea. Mr. Augustino is the inspiration 
behind the project. She shared Ms. Landis' concern of maintaining Pier 7. She, 
however, commended staff that the water in the pier is running. She requested the 
Commission to have staff perform regular maintenance on the pier. She urged the 
Commission to pass this resolution in honor of Mr. Augustino. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded 
the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

B. Status Report on the Ferry Building Renovation Project. 

Mr. Paul Osmundson, Director of Planning and Development indicated that staff 
made an informational presentation on the status of the Ferry Building Renovation 
project to the Commission on April 23, 1996. At that time, staff summarized the 
results of a series of technical reports completed in 1995 and early 1996 and laid out 
the series of steps staff intended to take to further the Port's ability to proceed with 
the project. 

Mr. Osmundson indicated that the Final EIS/EIR for the mid-Embarcadero Roadway 
Project has been certified by the City Planning Commission and federal approval is 
forthcoming. A BCDC permit amendment is expected in February. The design of the 
project should be completed by the end of 1997 and construction is scheduled to begin 
in early 1998 and expected to be completed by the end of 1999. 

A draft initial study for the Downtown Ferry Terminal has been completed, reviewed 
and tentatively approved by the San Francisco Office of Environmental Review (OER) 
and is being reviewed by Caltrans and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 
The design will be completed in April; construction is scheduled to commence in 
September of this year and should be completed by December 1998. 

In September 1996, the Board of Supervisors approved a 340-space underground 
parking garage on Block 202 as part of the Mid-Embarcadero Roadway project. Block 
202 is located across the Embarcadero from the north wing of the Ferry Building. 
Caltrans and the FHWA have tentatively approved compensating the Port for the 
value of the parking spaces to be removed from the Embarcadero as part of the Mid- 
Embarcadero Roadway project. 

A draft initial study for the Ferry Building has also been completed and is being 
reviewed by OER as well as Caltrans and the FHWA which is expected to be 
completed in September 1997. A draft "finding of effect" report has been prepared. 
A Memorandum of Understanding between the Port, the FHWA and the State Historic 

M021197.igq -3- 



Preservation office will be negotiated. Completion is expected in September 1997. 

The State Lands Commission has tentatively expressed support for a mixed use 
development at the Ferry Building that includes general office space in the Ferry 
Building. The project would be treated as part of an overall series of trust oriented 
projects in the area, including the Mid-Embarcadero Roadway Project and the 
Downtown Ferry Terminal Project. 

The De Young Museum Board is currently evaluating numerous sites for the museum 
including the Ferry Building, Broadway and the Embarcadero, Block 203, the 
Transbay Terminal, the Presidio and Golden Gate Park. The Port, however, is 
concerned about the financial structure of a lease with the De Young Museum and 
whether the museum is compatible with the preferred uses identified for the ground 
floor. Staff will report on this item after the Museum Board completes their 
evaluation of potential sites. 

The San Francisco Public Market Collaborative, along with other groups, have 
expressed interest in the ground floor of the Ferry Building. This use is compatible 
with the preferred uses but the major issue is whether the market can pay fair market 
rent. 

Staff expects to report back to the Commission in the next thirty days with a 
recommendation regarding the developer solicitation process for the Ferry Building 
Renovation Project and a schedule for appointing an advisory group. 

Areas adjacent to the Ferry Building have been assumed to be included in the project 
area, including the BART platform behind the building and the plaza areas in front of 
the building. Consideration may be given to including the Agriculture Building 
and/or Pier 1 in the project. The economic viability of this large area must be 
evaluated. 

The structure of the developer solicitation process is very important to the success of 
the project. Port staff is evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of various 
methods of selecting a developer, and has received input from development 
consultants and from other public agencies involved in public/private joint venture 
development projects. 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired about the time line for the Request for Proposals. 
Mr. Osmundson replied that the two main steps that need to be accomplished in the 
Waterfront Plan are: (1) the implementation process for mixed-use development 
projects, identifying and establishing an advisory group for the Port and (2) 
structuring and proposing an RFQ process. Staff believes that in the next few months 
staff would have a detailed report and a recommendation regarding the 
commencement of the development process. 

Approval of Amendment to Landing Rights License for Common Carrier Ferry 
Service Landing SlotlsVto provide rental credits for modifications to ramping system 



M021197.igq 



-4- 



at Pier Vfe. (Resolution No. 97-06) 

Mr. Paul Osmundson stated that this item was presented to the Commission in 
January. As reported at that time, the existing ramp and fendering systems at Pier V2 
ferry float need to be modified in order to address operational problems, including 
passenger circulation on the deck and ability to accommodate ferry vessels of different 
configurations. It was reported at that time that the City of Vallejo is constructing 
two new vessels scheduled to begin service in April. Currently, the common carriers 
pay landing fees based on a sliding scale. The estimated cost of designing and 
constructing the new ramping and fendering systems is approximately $140,000. An 
amendment to the Landing Agreement has been negotiated with the City of Vallejo 
and the other operators wherein the Port would be responsible for 50% of the actual 
project cost, not to exceed $70,000. The other 50% of the project cost would be 
borne by the City of Vallejo. The regular common carrier ferry service landing fees 
would resume once the operators have utilized the entire credit. During the rent 
credit period, the Port will pay for the maintenance and operating costs of the Pier x h 
float from its operating budget. In his conversations with ferryboat captains and 
others, they couldn't say for certain if the system would be able to accommodate all 
current and new vessels. The Commission commended staff for doing a good job in 
negotiating the terms. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy 

seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the 
resolution was adopted. 

D. Guidelines for review and approval of Signs and Murals on Port property. 
(Resolution No. 97-12) 

Mr. Osmundson stated that this item was previously before the Commission for its 
consideration. At the Commission's request, the City Attorney reviewed this item for 
constitutional issues. He noted that Commissioner Cook also had some input with the 
modifications. He indicated that this is a set of guidelines that Port staff would use in 
reviewing and approving sign permit applications and applications of murals. He 
noted that the guidelines are consistent with the Urban Design/Public Access Plan. 
Also at Commissioner Cook's suggestion, these guidelines will be sent to all Port 
tenants and will be included in all future leasing and licensing agreements. 

Commissioner Cook thanked staff for bringing this item to the Commission for 
adoption because he finds that the Port is inundated with signs along the waterfront 
and he hopes that this will partially resolve the problem and give the Port more 
control. He added that this was enacted by staff at a very appropriate time. He 
thanked staff for a job well done. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 



M021197.igq 



-5- 



8. ADMINISTRATION 

A. Approval of 1997/1998 Operating Budget. (Resolution No. 97-09) 

Mr. Ben Kutnick, Director of Administration, enumerated a few significant changes to 
the budget. Most notably the $1.2 million increase on revenues to the Port and $1.2 
million increase on the expense budget. The budget is due to the Mayor's office on 
February 21 . The Mayor will send the budget to the Board on June 1st for their 
approval. The Mayor and the Board have the authority to increase or decrease the 
budget. 

He indicated that organizational changes were also incorporated into the budget. A 
Maritime Division has been established that will include new responsibilities for the 
Marketing Department. The division currently called Tenant and Maritime Services 
will be changed to Real Estate and Asset Management. The title of the Administration 
Division has been changed to Finance and Administration. 

The major changes in the 97/98 revenue budget over the prior fiscal year are in cargo, 
ship repair, commercial and industrial rent, cruise and marketing revenue as follows: 

cargo revenue is projected to increase $557,500 due to the recently signed 

agreements with Serpac & Madrigal Wan Hai Lines 

ship repair revenue is projected to fall $553,000 due to the closure of the Service 

Engineering Company shipyard at Pier 50 

commercial and industrial rent is projected to increase $455,000 due to rent from 

percentage leases 

cruise revenue is projected to increase $216,500 due to increased passenger 

volume associated with larger vessel capacity and 

marketing revenue is projected to increase $425,000 due to increased filming and 

special event revenues. 

The major changes in the FY 97/98 expense budget are: 

• personnel costs - projected to increase $880,473 due to scheduled salary and step 
increases 

• other current expenses - projected to increase $542,976 due to increased 
professional services expense 

• debt service expense - projected to fall $461,700 based on current debt repayment 
schedule 

• services of other departments are projected to change significantly such as 
insurance expense is projected to fall $200,000 due to the renewal of insurance 
premiums at lower cost and City Attorney's expense is projected to increase 
$153,700 due to assignment of one additional attorney to the Port. 

Staff will return to the Commission with more changes to the budget. With the 
anticipated relocation of the Maintenance facility, staff is preparing a conventional 
loan financing and will be presented to the Commission for its approval in March. 

M021197.igq -6- 



Subsequently, staff will return to the Commission in the first meeting in April, to 
include the debt service to the loan into the budget and add $1.2 million anticipated 
ballpark lease and $1.2 million revenue for parking funds. Staff will return to the 
Commission for approval of any material revisions to the budget. 

Commissioner Cook made an observation that we are spending more than we are 
budgeted for even though the Port will have a budget surplus this year. He reminded 
staff that the Port needs to have over $1 million increased revenue per year. He asked 
staff to be very diligent in continuing what was done in the last few years. He 
indicated that this is a very tight and close budget. It is not adequate for the kind of 
operation the Port has to maintain. This is a revenue producing organization; it's an 
enterprise organization. It is an organization that needs to increase expenditures and 
revenue every year. Staff needs to secure more revenue or cut expenses to take care 
of running the Port. Otherwise, he commended staff for doing a good job on the 
budget. 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired about the City wide overhead. Mr. Kutnick replied 
that a cost plan is the basis for the charge which is done every year and it fluctuates 
every year. It represents the services other City departments provide and charge the 
Port. The current plan shows a much higher figure than what's actually in the budget 
but staff believes it can be negotiated. 

T 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired if the amount increases depending upon the phyical 
condition of the City. Mr. Kutnick replied to the negative. It is done by studies by 
actual time spent by the department performing the service. 

Commissioner Lee stated that he is happy with the budget and added that it is a bit 
conservative. He mentioned that Dennis Bouey has done an excellent job in the past, 
having a surplus three years in a row. He, however, encouraged a bigger budget in 
training. He believes that staff will benefit in attending training classes, seminars 
especially with regard to the computer and telecommunications industry. Mr. Kutnick 
agreed with Commissioner Lee. He indicated that staff is putting together a training 
comprehensive plan which will be completed soon. He noted that the training monies 
are now consolidated into the Human Resources budget so they can manage the 
training program and be proactive in developing programs for staff and managers. 

Commissioner Hardeman indicated that he appreciates the briefing Mr. Kutnick 
provided the Commissioners. He stated that the future of the Port looks bright and he 
believes that in the next couple of years the Port will not have any financial problems 
and thanked Mr. Kutnick for a job well done. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy 

seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the 
resolution was adopted. 



9. MARKETING 



M021197.igq 



10. CONSENT CALENDAR 

A. A pproval of Travel Authorization for Governmental Affairs Manager. Veronica 
Sanchez, to attend AAPA Spring Legislative Conference in Washington. D.C. on 
March 17-20. 1997. (Resolution No. 97-1 1) 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy 

seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the 
resolution was adopted. 

11. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

For the record, Commissioner Hardeman stated that Mr. Jay Wallace has indicated to him 
that he is in support of renaming Pier 7 in honor of Mr. Augustino. 

A. Discussion and public comment for the purpose of directing Port staff to develop Port 
policies for naming Port property, including ceremonial and memorial designations. 

Mr. Osmundson, Director of Planning and Development, stated that the Port has not 
had a policy with respect to naming or designating Port facilities. In discussions with 
the City Attorney's office, staff believes that there are some guidelines that staff could 
follow and establish in a policy and asked the Commission for directions and 
guidelines. 

Commissioner Cook stated that Port staff has had numerous and frequent requests of 
changing street names, naming of a sidewalk and today the designation of Pier 7. He 
requested that staff and Commission should set a policy for naming streets, memorial 
designations, placing plaques on Port property, etc. He asked staff to provide its 
recommendation to the Commission within thirty days. He suggested that staff can 
perhaps obtain information from the Landmark Advisory Boards. He also suggested 
that staff should look at different categories such as the waiting period, guidelines on 
what someone has had participated within the jurisdiction of the Port, etc. He 
suggested that staff should also look at the impacts of changing the street names. 

Commissioner Hardeman stated that Commissioners Cook and Lee will work with 
staff to establish a policy. Mr. Osmundson reiterated that staff will work with the 
committee to develop a policy. 

Commissioner Hardeman indicated that there will be a Special Meeting on February 
25, 1997 at 3 p.m. for a half-hour Giants presentation regarding the proposed 
ballpark. 

Commissioner Hardeman adjourned the meeting in memory of Doctor Goodlett and 
Mr. Herb Caen. He requested that appropriate notice be sent to the next of kin 
notifying them that the Commission adjourned the meeting in their memory. 

12. EXECUTIVE SESSION 



M021197.igq 



At 5:05 p.m., the Executive Secretary announced that the Commission will withdraw to 
executive session to discuss the following matters: 

A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT 

1) Confirmation of Appointment of Director of Facilities & Operations 

An executive session to discuss this matter is specifically authorized under 
California Government Code Section 54957. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING 
LITIGATION MATTER : 

1) Discuss existing litigation matter pursuant to subdivision (a) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 

a. Hal-Mar-Jac v. CCSF; San Francisco Superior Court No. 981389. 

At 6:15 p.m., Commissioners Hardeman, McCarthy, Lee, Cook and Herman returned 
from executive session and convened in public session. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval to not disclose any 
information discussed in the executive session, except for the 
appointment of Alexander Lee as Director of Facilities & Operations. 
Commissioner Cook seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners 
were in favor. 

The meeting was adjourned at 6:17 p.m. 



M021197.igq 



^SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

SPECIAL MEETING 

3:00 P.M., FEBRUARY 25, 1997 «-*-*-♦-*- Please note the time of the meeting 

FERRY BUILDING, SUITE 3100 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 






AGENDA DOCUMENTS DEPT. 



FEB 2 1337 
1. ROLL CALL SAN FRANC1S CQ 

PU3L1C L E 



2. NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC COMMENT 

Public comment is permitted on any matter within Port jurisdiction, and is not limited to 
agenda items. Public comment on non-agenda items may be raised during New 
Business/Public Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the Commission 
Secretary. 



3. SPECIAL ITEM 

A. Presentation by the China Basin Ballpark Corporation and public comments on the 
design and status of ballpark project on Port property located at China Basin between 
2nd and 3rd Streets, San Francisco, CA. 



4. ADJOURNMENT 



A022597.igq 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



FEBRUARY 25, 1997 

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

HON. MICHAEL HARDEMAN, PRESIDENT 
HON. DENISE McCARTHY, VICE PRESIDENT 
HON. FRANKIE G. LEE 
HON. PRESTON COOK 
HON. JAMES HERMAN 



DOUGLAS F. WONG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

OCT C 8 19S9 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING 
FEBRUARY 25, 1997 



1. ROLL CALL 

The meeting was called to order by Commission President Michael Hardeman at 3:05 
p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Michael Hardeman, Denise McCarthy, 
Frankie Lee, Preston Cook and James Herman. 

2. SPECIAL ITEM 

A. Presentation by the China Basin Ballpark Corporation and public comments on the 
design and status of ballpark project on Port property located at China Basin between 
2nd and 3rd Streets. San Francisco. CA. 

Mr. Paul Osmundson, Director of Planning and Development indicated that 
representatives from the China Basin Ballpark Corporation will make an informational 
presentation concerning the proposed ballpark. He also indicated that for the past 
year, the Port has been working with the Redevelopment Agency, City Planning and 
BCDC in reviewing the design of the proposed ballpark. He then introduced Jack 
Bair. 

Mr. Jack Bair gave details of the design of the proposed facility and gave an update of 
what transpired in the past year. After the election, they secured private financing for 
the ballpark as they committed to build the ballpark privately. They have secured a 
$140 million loan from Chase Securities and will be financing the remainder of the 
ballpark with the sale of charter seats and sponsorships. There will be component of 
tax increment financing also involved to fill out the public infrastructure and the 
public spaces of the ballpark. They also negotiated, with representatives of the Port, 
Redevelopment Agency and the Mayor's office, a ground lease upon which they 
would rent the ballpark site. The agreement will come before the Commission for 
approval in late spring or early summer. The Giants will initially pay $1.2 million a 
year in rent and the rent will be escalated over time and the Giants would commit to 
play a minimum of 23 baseball seasons in the new ballpark. They have also worked 
with the City in the development of the EIR on the ballpark project. The EIR will 
extensively analyze all the impacts of the project including traffic and circulation. 
The EIR is due out next month and will be the subject of a public hearing and public 
comment and will be before the Commission's consideration. The purpose of this 
presentation is to go over the design of the ballpark. They also put together a design 
team and introduced Joe Spear, their principal architect, who is noted as the architect 
of Camden Yards in Baltimore, Jacobs Fields in Cleveland and Coors Field in 
Denver. 



M022597.igq 



■1- 



Mr. Spear introduced the design team. Dennis Henmi of Kwan Henmi 
Architectural/Planning, provides interior architecture and design services for the 
ballpark project, including the club facility, lounge restaurant and other restaurants, 
Giants executive offices and Giants locker facility. 

Deborah Nichols, President of Deborah Nichols Design, provides graphic design 
services for the project, including building graphics and signage, logo design and 
identity programs as well as ADA and informational graphics. 

Satish B. of Ajmani and Pamidi, Inc., specializing in mechanical and electrical 
engineering, provides food service design services for the project. 

Olivia Chen of Olivia Chen Consultants serves as the Civil Engineer for the project 
and responsible for bringing all the utilities in and out of the ballpark, including 
water, waste water, storm drainage, telecommunications, gas and electricity. 

Richard Neurawski, one the structural engineering team members on the project, joint 
venture with Faye Bernstein & Associates, provides design of the foundation systems 
and repair and strengthen existing pier and bulkhead at Pier 46B. 

Michael Willis of Michael Willis & Associates provides project management and 
architecture services for the project. 

Pat O'Brien of Patricia O'Brien Landscape Architecture and Cheryl Barton will 
provide landscape architecture/design services for the project. 

Faye Bernstein, a joint venture partner with Rutherford and Chekene, provides 
structural engineering services for the project. 

Mr. Spear acknowledged: (1) Dean Macris who has been an invaluable resource to the 
team, (2) Thorton-Tomasetti/Engineers, structural engineers from New York; (3) 
M-E Engineers from Colorado who will provide mechanical and electrical engineering 
services; (4) Horton Lees, lighting designer, from San Francisco and (5) Janet Nolan. 

Mr. Spear showed slides of Camden Yard, Coors Field and Jacobs Field and he gave 
a descriptive/comparative analysis to the proposed ballpark. 

The proposed ballpark has three major seating decks with one level of suite located 
just beneath the upper deck. The ground keeper's domain has 6,000 sq. ft. of space. 
There are spaces for 7 semi-trucks; 4 of those trucks will be used for television 
broadcast; the other 3 will be for food deliveries and souvenirs. There will be 
stadium personnel office, concessionaire warehouse, Giants club house, ticket office, 
club lounge, visitors club house, parking spaces, mechanical spaces and retail spaces. 
The strategy is to link the retail facilities from Third Street along the Port walk and to 
give a variety of experience along the Port walk. 



M022597.igq 



-2- 



The next level is the main seating deck which has a continuous concourse that goes 
around the park. With the exception of the press box, a person strolling around the 
concourse can see the game. It promotes a lot of social interaction. There is also a 
second level of retail in the pavilion building. The Pac Bell learning center is also 
located on this level. 

The next level is the club level which has a concourse that has a view of the field and 
has 13 rows of seats. Access to and from the seats is through the enclosed heated/air 
conditioned round space. It is designed to be a little upscale. A spectacular brew pub 
and sports themed restaurant, located in the center field, will allow fans to savor 
magnificent views of both the playing field and the bay. 

The next level is the suite level. There are sixty-five suites on this level and each seat 
about 12 persons a piece. There is a food service area and a Giants office in the 
Pavilion building. This is the only concourse level that does not have a view of the 
playing field. 

The Giants and Pat O'Brien came up with a Willie Mays statue in front of the 
building. The graphic motif for the ballpark will be the "trademark" of the ball 
hitting the water. They have chosen to reorient the ballpark slightly which creates 
more space at Lefty O'Doule entrance and allows them to create a building which is in 
more keeping with the spirit of San Francisco. 

The Giants were very keen on maintaining the views they had from the seating bowl 
to the water. They have kept the seats back away from the view, near the left foul 
pole and frame a nice view of the marina and the bay. They have combined a central 
centerpiece for the park that would combine the scoreboard with the restaurant. One 
of the unique things is the ability to see the scoreboard in the restaurant. It was a very 
unique response to group all those things together. The scoreboard itself is about 
7,000 sq. ft. 

Commissioner Hardeman, on behalf of the Commission, thanked Mr. Spear for a 
great presentation. 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired about the location of the portwalk. Mr. Spear 
replied that the portwalk starts and connects with the Third Street Lefty O'Doule 
Bridge and goes along the back end of the ballpark to the center field restaurant and 
connects with the portwalk along the South Beach Marina. 

Commissioner Lee thanked Mr. Spear for his presentation. He stated that he is 
impressed with the group of local consultants; most of them are his dear friends and 
some are a couple of his competitors. He indicated that he had the opportunity to tour 
the Coors Field in Denver. He was very impressed with the ballpark; it is very 
comfortable and intimate. The lighting is great and the concourse which opens up to 
the playing field is a great feature. 

Mr. Spear mentioned that the proposed ballpark main course is 38 feet wide and 



M022597.igq 



3Com is only 21 feet wide. 

Commissioner Lee inquired about the major differences between Coors Field and the 
Pac Bell ballpark. Mr. Spear replied that the Pac Bell ballpark has an incredible 
opportunity with the close proximity of the bay and the marina. There isn't any place 
that would be able to compete with that. The Giants are very excited with that but the 
key is to make the facility fit the City. The Pac Bell ballpark is about 13 acres, 
including the portwalk and all of the sidewalks shown. Coors Field is 15 acres. 
Coors Field accommodates 50,000 seats, Pac Bell 42,000 seats. 

Commissioner Lee inquired about the difficulties of the site. Mr. Spear replied that 
this site has a high- water table. In Coors Field and Jacobs Field, they were able to 
lower the playing field, dig out a bowl that is 20 feet below the street. 

Mr. Dean Macris stated that they looked at two other sites: (1) foot of Rincon Hill, 
South of Folsom Street near the water behind the Hills Bros, property (2) Seventh and 
Townsend Street. They had difficulties with Rincon Hill. The advantage of Rincon is 
its close proximity to the downtown area but the site was not large enough and the 
land cost is considerbly higher. At 7th and Townsend they had the same problems. It 
is a site not configured well for the ballpark because it is more square in dimension 
and is considerably removed from downtown. The transportation access for the 
proposed ballpark is unequaled in any other City. Muni Metro, Caltrains and ferry 
boats will service the ballpark. The Bart officials are also anxious to serve the 
ballpark. 

Commissioner Lee inquired if there is enough restroom for women. Mr. Spear 
replied that there are 74 restrooms as opposed to 37 at 3Com Park. 

Commissioner Hardeman stated that the group did a spectacular job of blending the 
South of Market with the waterfront. 

3. NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC COMMENT 

Jim Firth, resident of Potrero Hill, stated that he is one of the minority of people who 
voted in opposition of a baseball stadium when it was on the ballot last year. He 
commended the team for an excellent presentation. Regarding the Port Maintenance 
facility, he understands that there are arrangements in the lease negotiations for the facility 
to be relocated at a cost that is going to be offset by' the rerouting of parking revenues 
from the Port to the cost for that relocation of about $1.2 million per year. He wondered 
if there is a term of time anticipated for the reallocation to take place and where the money 
would have gone had it not been going to this. 

Mr. Wong suggested that Mr. Paul Osmundson, Director of Planning and Development, 
will be able to provide him the information. Commissioner Hardeman interjected and 
stated that the Commission does not get into negotiations during the public session. Mr. 
Firth inquired if the lease agreement will be made available to the public soon. Mr. Jack 
Bair replied that in December the term sheet that was negotiated with the City and the 



M022597.igq 



-4- 



Giants was released to the public. Mayor Brown released a detailed statement about the 
terms of the lease. It will appear before the Port Commission for approval after the EIR 
has been certified which will occur sometime in the summer. Mr. Firth inquired if he can 
expect an explanation about the escalation of the $1 .2 million rent. Mr. Bair stated that is 
all part of the lease document. 

Ms. Jane Morrison stated that it sounds like a great ballpark. She's especially attached to 
the South Beach Park and the South Beach Harbor and she's surprised to see the sketch so 
close to the harbor. She wondered if the existing park will be a part of the garage 
structure. Mr. Bair replied that it is not. The plan is to increase the size of the park and 
suppress the parking in that area to satisfy the harbor's and ballpark's needs. Ms. 
Morrison is interested about what the designers have done to protect the residential 
neighborhood. Mr. Bair stated that part of the EIR is the study on the wind and the 
impacts of the wind. The report will be out in March. 

Jeffrey Leibovitz, South Park, commended the design team. He was concerned about the 
traffic impact of the ballpark to the neighborhood. He stated that Muni does not work 
very well now and wondered how the fans will be serviced. The scoreboard will cast a 
very large shadow on the South Beach Marina. The people in the neighborhood wondered 
about the effects of the shadows. He pointed out that the citizens comments at the CAAC 
meeting about the billboard and the shadowing of the park were quite opposite of what 
Mr. Spear represented. 

Mr. Scott Callaway, 4th generation San Francisco Twin Peaks resident, commented about 
the light stanchions next to the center field board. He is noted that the two light 
stanchions pointed directly back to the City are going to be disturbing, distracting and 
unfortunate. He wondered why the center field light stanchions were added and wondered 
if they can be taken out or have them cleverly disguised. Mr. Bair responded that the 
lights shine directly on the field. The lights are theatre stage lighting. They light 
quadrants of the field and will not be visible in the other side of the ballpark. When the 
data is completed by the City's study, these lights should not pose a problem. 

Mr. Norman Pearce, member of the South Beach Yacht Club and owner of the Pier 40 
Roast Street Cafe, commended the group for maintaining the integrity of the park and a 
good design for the park complex. He requested from the Port a liaison between the Port 
and local community to deal with the outside issues of the park. During the negotiations 
with the Giants, it is appropriate to establish an independent community away from the 
Redevelopment Agency to help deal with the external problems. He requested that this be 
considered in the negotiations. 



The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m. 



M022597.igq 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 
REGULAR MEETING 
4:00 P.M., FEBRUARY 25, 1997 FEB 2 1337 

FERRY BUILDING, SUITE 3100 SAN FRANCISCO 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC LIBRARY 

/ 

*rM .AGENDA 

1. ROLL CALL 

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 11, 1997 Special Meeting & Regular Meeting 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Executive Director's Report 

4. LEGISLATIVE 

A. Resolution authorizing the Executive Director to seek programmatic changes to 
Proposition 116 Grants (Fiscal Years 91/92 and 92/93) from the California 
Transportation Commission for the Downtown Ferry Terminal and to seek the final 
allocation of funds for construction. (Resolution No. 97-16) 

5. REAL ESTATE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT 

A. Approval of percentage rental adjustments for Scoma's Restaurant located on Pier 47 
at Fisherman's Wharf. (Resolution No. 97-13) 

B. Consent to non-charter excursions from Pier 39 marina by vessels not owned by Pier 
39. (Resolution No. 97-14) 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

A. Approval of Fourth Amendment to authorize additional design and construction 
review work for Professional Services Contract No. SA 3930045. "Downtown Ferry 
Terminal Project" with ROMA Design Group. (Resolution No. 97-18) 

B. Authorization to award Contract 2622, "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit Project." 
(Resolution No. 97-19) 



A0225 l )7.kq 



7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. Briefing and Public Hearing on the Draft Concept Agreement between the Port of San 
Francisco, BCDC and Save San Francisco Bay Association regarding public access 
and urban design improvements and BCDC regulatory amendments to be achieved 
through implementation of the Waterfront Land Use Plan. 

8. MARITIME 

9. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 

10. MARKETING 

11. CONSENT CALENDAR 

A. Authorization for the Executive Director to participate in the Mayor's Goodwill and 
Friendship Mission to China on March 31-April 12, 1997 (Resolution No. 97-15) 

B. Approval of travel authorization for one Port representative to travel to Oxnard, CA 
to attend the West Coast Conference on Contaminated Soils and Groundwater on 
March 10-14, 1997. (Resolution No. 97-17) 

C. Approval of lease with S&C Ford of San Francisco for 66,000 sq. ft. of shed space at 
Pier 50, Shed "C" (Mission Rock Street at Terry Francois Blvd.) (Resolution No. 
97-20) 

12. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

13. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 



closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. 



* 



1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specificallv authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/P ort re presentative. * 



■\022597 iaq 



> 



1) Property : Port property located at Pier 80 

Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*NorCal Representative : Mike Sangiacomo, President and Don Moriel, Executive 
Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING 
LITIGATION MATTER: 

1) Neudecker v. Bouey . Superior Court No. 964-862 and Neudecker v. CCSF . 974- 
043; pursuant to subdivision (a) of California Government Code Section 54956.9 

D. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 
Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 

14. ADJOURNMENT 

Public comment is permitted on any matter within Port jurisdiction, and is not limited to agenda 
items. Public comment on non-agenda items may be raised during New Business/Public 
Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the Commission Secretary . 



A022507 icq " J " 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



MEMORANDUM 



February 17, 1997 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



FROM: 
SUBJECT: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 
President Michael Hardeman 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. James R. Herman 

Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director /S^ 

Resolution Authorizing the Executive Director to Seek Programmatic Changes 
to Proposition 116 Grants (Fiscal Years 91/92 and 92/93) from the California 
Transportation Commission for the Downtown Ferry Terminal; and to Seek the 
Final Allocation of Funds for Construction. 



DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Resolution. 
BACKGROUND ON PRIOR CTC GRANTS 

In FY 91/92, the California Transportation Commission (CTC) awarded the Port 
of San Francisco a $5.8 million grant out of funds from Proposition 116, the Clean Air and 
Transportation Improvement Act, for various capital improvements to its ferry terminal 
operations including the seismic retrofit of Pier x h , construction of a passenger terminal and 
disability access improvements. 

In FY 92/93, the (CTC) awarded the Port of San Francisco another grant of $2.7 
million grant out of Proposition 116 funds to construct a second passenger waiting area 
inside the Ferry Building; improve passenger circulation in and around the Ferry Building; 
connect the new waiting areas with existing terminal; and provide new signage. 

On August 5, 1993, The CTC granted the Port an initial allocation of $977,388 to 
cover the costs of design and engineering for the capital improvements. Consistent with 
the applications submitted to the CTC, the initial design work included the development 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 4 A 



Memorandum to the San Francisco Port Commission 
Downtown Ferry Terminal - Item 4A, February 25, 1997 



of a master plan for the Downtown Ferry Terminal. The findings of the conceptual 
design study, prepared by the ROMA Design Group, recommended the establishment of 
two ferry basins adjacent to the Ferry Building to relieve congestion at the terminals 
and to accommodate the anticipated increase in future routes. The conceptual study 
was reviewed by the Port Commission in July 1994 and was also submitted to the CTC, 
CALTRANS and FHWA. 

PROJECT SCOPE 

1. Installation of the South Terminal, South Terminal Promenade and South 
Arcade 

When the original CTC grant was developed a second barge was envisioned 
immediately adjacent to the barge at Pier Vi. How6ver, ferry operators requested that the 
second barge be moved further away from the existing Pier Vi barge and away from the 
Golden Gate Ferry Terminal. 

The second landing facility, immediately South of the Ferry Building, will provide 
more efficient landing facilities by avoiding operational delays in vessels queuing up to 
enter the terminals. The North barge which will be moved closer to the north side of the 
Ferry Building will serve ferries to Marin County and North Bay locations, including 
Solano County will introduce two new high speed vessels in early 1997. The South Basin, 
located in the area adjacent to Sinbad's Restaurant, will serve ferries bound for existing 
destinations in the East and South Bay. 

The location of a second barge on the South side of the Ferry Building will also 
require the construction of new and reinforced concrete deck (South Terminal Promenade) 
connecting the promenade area adjacent to the South Terminal with connections to the 
Golden Gate Ferry Terminal (east of the Ferry Building) and the Embarcadero. The new 
deck will be designed and built as an essential structure able to withstand major 
earthquakes, consistent with the objective put forward in the first grant to the CTC. The 
arcade area under the Ferry Building on the south side will be resurfaced. 

A series of passenger amenities will be provided to support the new landing 
facility, such as benches, awnings over the ramps to the barge, railings, lighting and trash 
cans. A small amount of dredging (14,000) will be done in the South Basin and at the 
North landing. 

2. Installation of a Breakwater 

A new sheet pile breakwater needs to be constructed south of the new landing 
facility for protection of vessels from wave action from southwest storms which cause 

-2- 



Memorandum to the San Francisco Port Commission 
Downtown Ferry Terminal - Item 4A, February 25, 1997 



operational delays that undermine the confidence of passengers using ferry service as a 
reliable commute option. 

The breakwater will allow the region to accommodate the future growth in ferry 
service because it provides ample space to accommodate the installation of two new berths 
for new ferry routes, including hovercraft service to San Francisco International Airport 
and service to Treasure Island and Hunters Point. The breakwater will protect the 
landing and vessels from damage caused by wave action. 

3. Seismic Retrofit of Pier l /i and Relocation of the Pier Vz Barge North of the 
Ferry Building and East Promenade 

A new reinforced concrete promenade, east of the Ferry Building, will be provided 
along the Northern facade of the Ferry Building connecting to a relocated (from Pier Vi) 
Northern landing facility. The concrete promenade will be designed as an essential 
structure, capable of withstanding a major earthquake, and providing access to the landing 
facility. 

4. Passenger Terminals and Amenities 

A central hallway through the Ferry Building connecting all landing facilities to 
other forms of transit along the Embarcadero and Market Street will be established. 

Wind breaks and awnings over all ramping and portions of the landing facilities 
will be installed. A 15 foot metal awning along the Bay side of the Ferry Building will be 
placed to connect the Northern Landing with the central hallway through the Ferry 
Building. 

Installation of benches, lighting, trash cans and a decorative hand railing 
throughout the Downtown Terminal Project and along the Bayside connection to the 
northern landing facility to the Golden Gate Ferry Terminal. An improved, smooth 
walking surface will be provided to indicate passenger waiting areas and circulation paths. 
The walking surface will be similar in design to the Embarcadero Promenade which is 
scheduled for completion in early 1999. 

5. Provide a Comprehensive Signage Program from the Embarcadero to all 
landing facilities. 

6. Provide Disability Improvements throughout the Downtown Ferry Terminal. 

All proposed improvements will comply with the Port of San Francisco's Design 
Guidelines for the disabled in a marine environment. The guidelines have been reviewed 



Memorandum to the San Francisco Port Commission 
Downtown Ferry Terminal - Item 4A, February 25, 1997 



and approved by the City's Disability Advisory as being incompliance with ADA. 
PROJECT STATUS 

Design and Engineering work is nearly complete. An Initial Study/Environmental 
Assessment (IS/EA) has been completed for this project and has been reviewed by the 
San Francisco Office of Environmental Review for compliance with CEQA. The project 
is pending right of way and NEPA certification by CALTRANS and certification is 
scheduled for completion by April 1, 1997. 

To obtain the final allocation of Proposition 116 funds ($7.5 million) for 
construction of the Downtown Ferry Terminal Project, the Port Commission must request 
a programmatic change to its FY 91/92 & FY 92/93 grant applications. The programmatic 
changes include revisions in the project's scope, costs and the addition of new Federal 
funding sources. The CTC's application requires the Port Commission's resolution to 
include specific statements which are included in the attached resolution. 

Staff is preparing the application for submission for consideration at the CTC's 
April 28, 1997 meeting. Pending environmental approvals, the Port will also ask the 
CTC to approve its request to allocate the balance of Proposition 116 funds. 

If the CTC approves the Port's requests for a programmatic change and allocation 
of Proposition 116 funds, staff proposes to seek the Commission's approval of the bid 
advertisement at the May 13, 1997 meeting. If the contract is awarded by the 
Commission at its August 26 meeting, construction could commence by September 1, 
1997 and be completed by December 1998. 

PROJECT FUNDING 

In 1995, the Port successfully attracted new Federal monies to cover the additional 
costs of installing the breakwater at the South Basin. Staff is currently working with 
Federal agencies to finalize the documents necessary to have funding in place by the time 
the project goes back to the Port Commission for approval of bid documents. The 
Proposition 116 funds will be used to match the new Federal grants. 

A summary of project's costs and sources of funding for the Downtown Terminal 
Project is attached. 

Prepared by: Veronica Sanchez 
Manager, Governmental Affairs 



4- 



o 
o 
to 

o 



u- 

I 



DC 

o 

a. 







o 


o 




o 


o 




CO 


CO 






in 


r- 






r»- 


co 






r^ 


f> 






o 


CO 






O) 


CM 






CO 


T^ 


1 1 


— I 


«/» 


1 



T-- *» 



■ vf vi l/i 



o> n 



■a. « * 



< 

z 



LU 

i- 
ir 

I 



o 

Q 



<e 



(0! 

Hj! 
(0 

o 

o 

LU 

-II 
Oil 

ir 
q. 



■*-* j: ■— M 

"3 i-n co ml 
(01 OX «S! S 

| | Mil 

ill "181 

CO 3! K 

i- ooi o) m 

fl >v <5! f ! 
•ji C^ C! *<i 

I £11 

t^ CN CO >(f 



O CD 



CO 



oa .5 



v> 



LU 



O 

o 
in 

O) 

oi 
<o 



u»i it r-t co 



(0 

co 
o 

c 

CO 
CO 

c 

!B 

c 
o 
o 



CO 

I- 
CO 

o 
o 

\- 
o 

LU 

-J 

o 

(£ 

Q. 

-I 
< 

o 



OIO; 



o 

Z> 

o 
to 

a 

z 

G 

Z 

3, 

H 



v> 



LO 



c 
o 

c^° 



g & 

4 1, 

< <l 

1 i 

III 

LLj Lt-I 



</» 



LO 



ID 



(O 

CO! CO 



oil" 
SI o 

(- Q) 
| W 



8 

w 
o 
c 
ro uv 

§h 

COI 



CD 



a 

o 

in 
in 

o> 

<vi 

(0 
1^ 

CO 

m 



o 

CO 

o 
o> 

CO 



CM 
O 



o 

z 

a 

z 

LL 

LU 

-1 

mi 

J: 

I; 

-J 
< 

£ 

(01 

T3: 

c: 

31 
LU, 

I 



ll 

H E< 

.551 2>i 
Ei (oi 

Oi "O 

its! c 
roi 3 



1 

■e 
a> 
co 

c 

CO 

c 
a> 

T3 

c 
roi 



TO 






s 






8 






(0 













c 




■ 


TO 







c 

TO 
CO 

«*— 
O 

■c 
o 

CL 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



MEMORANDUM 



February 13, 1997 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 41 5 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James R. Herman 



FROM: 



> 



Douglas F. Wong^xJ. 
Executive Director 



SUBJECT: Approval of percentage rental adjustment for Scoma's Restaurant located on Pier 
47 at Fisherman's Wharf. 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE PERCENTAGE RENTAL 

ADJUSTMENTS SET FORTH HEREIN 



Scoma's Restaurant, Incorporated ("Scoma's") operates Scoma's Restaurant on Pier 47 pursuant 
to Port Lease No. L-8996, whose lease term extends until April 30, 2036 ("Lease"). This Lease 
provides for the payment of percentage rental, which is subject to periodic review and adjustment. 
If the rates of percentage rental for like uses in San Francisco in the vicinity have increased or 
decreased as of the adjustment date, then the Port is to adjust the rate of percentage rental for the 
Lease accordingly. If Scoma's disagrees on the amount of the adjustment, then Scoma's has the 
right to terminate the Lease without liability for future rent. Per an agreement between Scoma's 
and the Port, dated April 30, 1987, the next adjustment date for percentage rental under the Lease 
is May 1, 1997. 

The following table shows the three categories of percentage rental set forth in the Lease, and the 
current percentage rental rates for these uses. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 5A 



Agenda Item No. 5A 
Page 2 



Food 5.5% 

Alcoholic beverages & all other 

items sold through the bar 7.5% 

All other uses 7.5% 

In 1995, the Port retained a market consultant to perform a market survey and analysis of 
percentage rents in the Fisherman's Wharf vicinity. Port staff also held several discussions with 
tenants at Fisherman's Wharf whose percentage rentals were then subject to adjustment. Based 
upon the independent survey and analysis obtained from the Port's consultant, the input provided 
by Port tenants and their consultants, and Port staff's own consideration and review of the data 
available to it, Port staff concluded that the percentage rental for restaurants providing full table 
service which are located over the water should be adjusted to the following percentage rental 
rates: 

Food 6.5% 

Alcoholic beverages & all other 

items sold through the bar 6.5% 

All other uses 8.5% 

Based upon this staff recommendation, the Port Commission in 1996 reset the percentage rentals 
for ten such restaurants at Fisherman's Wharf to the rates indicated above. Port staff now 
recommends that the Port Commission reset the percentage rental for Scoma's Restaurant to these 
same percentage rental rates effective May 1, 1997. 



Prepared by: Kirk W. Bennett, Sr. Property Manager, 

Northern Waterfront & Fisherman's Wharf 



> 



PORT COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-13 



WHEREAS, 



Charter Section B3.581 empowers the Port Commission with the power and 
duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and control the Port 
area of San Francisco; and 



WHEREAS, 



under Charter Section B3. 58 1(g) leases granted or made by the Port 
Commission shall be administered exclusively by the operating forces of the 
Port Commission; and 



WHEREAS, 



RESOLVED, 



Port Lease No. L-8996 with Scoma's Restaurant, Incorporated, dated April 1, 
1974 ("Lease"), provides for the adjustment in the percentage rental, effective 
May 1, 1997, based upon the determination that the percentage rentals for like 
uses in San Francisco in the vicinity' of the leased premises have increased or 
decreased; and now therefore be it 

that the Port Commission determines that the percentage rentals for the uses 
indicated below in San Francisco in the vicinity of the leased premises are as 
indicated below and that the percentage rental for the Lease shall be adjusted 
as indicated below, effective May 1, 1997, and the Port Commission authorize 
the Executive Director, or his designee, to execute the proper documentation 
as needed to implement this resolution. 



Food 



6.5% 



Alcoholic beverages & all other 
items sold through the bar 

All other uses 



6.5% 
8.5% 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its meeting of 
February 25, 1997. 



Secretary 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\SCOMA.KB\ibn\February 13, 1997 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



February 13, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 41 5 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James R. Herman 



FROM: Douglas F. Wong /, 

Executive Director A" 

SUBJECT: Consent to tour boats operating from the Pier 39 Marina which are not operated by 
Pier 39 Limited Partnership. 



DIRECTORS RECOMMENDATION: 



CONSENT TO TOUR BOATS OPERATING 
FROM THE PIER 39 MARINA WHICH ARE 
NOT OPERATED BY PIER 39 LIMITED 
PARTNERSHIP 



Background 

The Pier 39 master lease (Port Lease No. L-9707), as amended on October 31, 1979 (the 
"Lease"), authorizes certain specified uses on the premises demised in the Lease. The Lease 
provides that any new use or change of use not authorized in the Lease requires consent by the 
Port, and it further provides that the Port and the Pier 39 Limited Partnership ("Tenant") negotiate 
the new rent due the Port for the new use or change of use. In the event that Port and Tenant are 
unable to agree on the rent, the Lease provides for binding arbitration. Pursuant to these 
provisions, the Port Commission at its September 26, 1995 meeting (by Resolution 95-59) 
consented to a seaplane use at Pier 39, and the Port Commission at its December 20, 1996 meeting 
(by Resolution 96-124) consented to wireless telecommunication services at Pier 39. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 5B 



Agenda Item No. 5B 
Page 2 



Among the authorized uses for the premises demised by the Lease are the following uses: 

"Marina (including berthing and slip rental for pleasure craft and yachts, party and charter 
boats, including fishing boats [specifically excluding, however, any tour boat or ferry 
boat])." 

"Tenant operated tour boats," which are defined as "any passenger boat, ferry boat, 
excursion boat or other transportation or excursions for hire service accepting passengers 
or discharging passengers at Pier 39." 

The Lease does not therefore authorize tour boats not operated by Tenant to operate from the Pier 
39 Marina located on the premises, except for party and charter boat operations. 

Tenant has been approached by the owners of the Adventure Cat, which is a catamaran sailboat 
operating from South Beach Harbor primarily on a charter basis, to relocate to the Pier 39 Marina, 
where it would offer charters, as well as tours, which would involve trips for which tickets are 
purchased by passengers on an individual basis. It has also been observed by Port staff that a few 
berth holders at the Pier 39 Marina currently operate such tours, although Tenant has indicated 
that no revenue is paid to Tenant from these tours above the berth rental. 

Pursuant to the Lease, Tenant currently pays rent to the Port equal to 7% of tour boat revenues 
(as defined in the Lease) for Tenant operated tour boats (with a temporary reduction to 5% of such 
revenues until certain improvements made by Tenant are amortized). At its October 28, 1992 
meeting (by Resolution 92-112), the Port Commission approved a policy for accommodating 
additional excursion boats at the Port of San Francisco. Based on the research done by Port staff 
in formulating this policy, the Port Commission resolved that the percentage rent to the Port for 
excursions covered by the policy should be in the range of 5% to 7% percent of gross receipts. 
At its September 14, 1995 meeting (by Resolution 95-91), the Port Commission adopted a standard 
form Landing Rights License for Casual Landings at Pier Vi which provided for a percentage fee 
to the Port calculated at 7% of gross receipts for excursion casual landings at Pier Vi. 

Proposed Port Consent 

Port staff recommends that the Port Commission consent to tour boat operations not operated by 
Tenant to operate from the Pier 39 Marina on tours of San Francisco Bay, for which tickets are 
purchased from the tour boat operator by passengers on an individual basis. Such consent shall 
be subject to the condition that such use shall be limited to (a) operators of sailboats properly 
authorized by the U.S. Coast Guard, and (b) operators of power boats properly authorized by the 
U.S. Coast Guard to carry not more than 48 passengers. 



Agenda Item No. 5B 
Page 3 



Pursuant to the provisions of the Lease, Port staff and Tenant have agreed that the rent to be paid 
to the Port for such tour boat operations not operated by Tenant are to be calculated at 7 % of all 
gross receipts generated by the owner or operator of such operations. 



Prepared by: Kirk W. Bennett, Sr. Property Manager, 
Northern Waterfront/Fisherman's Wharf 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\TOURBOAT.KB\ibn\February 18, 1997 



PORT COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-14 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 
WHEREAS, 



RESOLVED, 



Charter Section B3.581 empowers the Port Commission with the power and 
duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and control the 
Port area of San Francisco; and 

under Charter Section B3. 58 1(g) leases granted or made by the Port 
Commission shall be administered exclusively by the operating forces of the 
Port Commission; and 

pursuant to Section VLB of that lease agreement dated October 31, 1979, 
by and between North Point Center, Inc. (with Pier 39 Limited Partnership 
as successor in interest), as Tenant, and the City and County of San 
Francisco acting through its Port Commission, as Landlord, as amended 
(the "Lease"), Tenant is permitted to change uses authorized by the Lease 
or to add a facility, operation or use not specifically authorized by the 
Lease; and 

the Port has the right of approval and consent to such intended changes of 
use, not to be unreasonably withheld; and 

the Port Commission's consent has been requested for use of the premises 
under the Lease for tour boat operations from the Marina located therein by 
persons or entities other than Tenant, involving tours of San Francisco Bay 
for which tickets are purchased from the tour boat operator by passengers 
on an individual basis, provided such use shall be limited to (a) operators of 
sailboats properly authorized by the United States Coast Guard, and (b) 
operators of power boats properly authorized by the United States Coast 
Guard to carry no more than 48 passengers (collectively, "Non-Tenant Tour 
Boat Operations"); now therefore, be it 

that the Port Commission hereby approves the new use consisting of Non- 
Tenant Tour Boat Operations, subject to satisfaction and compliance with 
those conditions attached hereto as Exhibit A : and be it further 



Resolution No. 97-14 
Page 2 



RESOLVED, that the Port Commission hereby approves the percentage rent for the Non- 

Tenant Tour Boat Operations use as set forth as Condition 3 of the 
conditions attached hereto as Exhibit A. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its meeting of 
February 25, 1997. 



Secretary 

G:\WP51\AGENDAS\TOURBOAT.KB\ibn\February 18, 1997 



EXHIBIT A 

CONDITIONS TO PORT APPROVAL OR NON-TENANT 
TOUR BOAT OPERATIONS 

(Attachment to Resolution No. 97-14) 



1. Compliance with All Applicable Laws . Tenant or its subtenant operating Non-Tenant 
Tour Boat Operations (collectively, "Subtenant") shall comply with all permits required 
and issued with respect to the Non-Tenant Tour Boat Operations and with all laws relating 
to or affecting use of the demised premises applicable to the approved use currently in 
effect or which may hereafter be in effect at any time during the remainder of the Lease 
term, whether or not now contemplated by the parties. 

2. No Cost or Liability on the Part of the Port . All costs associated with any approvals for 
or operation of the proposed use shall be borne by Tenant or Subtenant, and Tenant or 
Subtenant shall be solely responsible for complying with any and all conditions imposed 
by regulatory agencies and shall pay any and allilnes or penalties imposed as a result of 
the failure of Tenant or Subtenant to comply with the terms and conditions of any 
regulatory approvals, and, to the fullest extent permitted by law, Tenant and Subtenant 
agree to defend, indemnify and hold City, Port and their agents harmless from and against 
any loss, expense, costs, damage, attorney's fees, penalties, claims or liabilities which 
City or Port may incur as a result of Tenant's or Subtenant's failure to obtain or comply 
with the terms and conditions of any regulatory approvals or as a result of the operation of 
the approved use. 

3. Payment of Rent . Commencing as of the date of Port approval of Resolution No. 97-14, 
and for so long as there are Non-Tenant Tour Boat Operations from the premises demised 
in the Lease, Tenant shall pay or cause to be paid to Port a sum equal to seven percent 
(7%) of all gross receipts generated by the operator or owner of the Non-Tenant Tour 
Boat Operations. 

4. Acknowledgment . Tenant shall provide Port with an acknowledgment of its agreement to 
comply with all of the foregoing conditions by signing below. 

Acknowledged and Agreed: 

"Tenant" 



Fritz Arko 

President, Pier 39 Limited Partnership 

G:\WP51\AGENDAS\TOURBOAT.KB\ibn\February 18. 1997 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



MEMORANDUM 



February 18, 1997 



TO: MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 

FROM: Douglas F. Wong .U^j 

Executive Director/ 

SUBJECT: Professional Services Contract No. SA 3930045, "DOWNTOWN FERRY 
TERMINAL," with Roma Design Group, approval of Fourth Amendment to authorize 
additional design and construction review work. 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT NO. 
SA 3930045 WITH ROMA DESIGN GROUP FOR $246,595. 



In March, 1 994, The Port contracted with Roma Design Group ("Consultant") for $593,255, to assist Port 
Staff with the design of the Downtown Ferry Terminal Project. As the project progressed, Port Staff 
successfully secured additional funding and expanded the scope of the project accordingly. On November 
21, 1994, the Commission approved Contract Amendment No. 2 for $384,763 for additional design work, 
including a new breakwater and the relocation of the boiler room/utility area, which is currently 
positioned on the east deck adjacent to the Ferry Building. On August 29, 1995, the Commission 
approved Contract Amendment No. 3 for $39,741 to perform additional environmental studies related 
to the proposed breakwater. (Amendment No. 1 involved a no-cost, incidental change to the contract 
which did not require Commission approval.) These costs are itemized below: 

Original contract amount: $593,255 

Amendment No. 2 $384,763 

Amendment No. 3 $39.741 

Total to date: $1,017,759 

THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 6A 

I:\wp51\agd-dft4.jr 



Page 2 



To date, Port Staff, with the assistance of the Consultant, has prepared approximately 90% of the contract 
documents for the Downtown Ferry Terminal Project. Several issues have recently surfaced requiring 
revisions and/or additions to the construction contract documents and increases to the scope of 
construction stage services. These items are itemized below: 

• Since its primary inception, the length of the breakwater structure has approximately 
doubled, and soil borings have revealed soil conditions vastly different from what were 
initially assumed, requiring additional complex structural analyses. Addressing these 
matters requires a change order in the work scope. Also, the estimated cost of the 
breakwater as presently designed is $7,100,000.00, which exceeds the construction 
budget. Port Staff needs the Consultant to revise the breakwater contract documents and 
specifications to ensure that the final design falls within the budget. 

• On-site surveys conducted at the Ferry Building during the course of the boiler facility 
design have revealed different mechanical conditions than those represented by the Port 
at the start of the project. Addressing these existing condition issues requires a change 
in the Consultant's work scope. 

• To improve passenger circulation the Port proposes to remove three raised planters on 
the Ferry Plaza, located between the Ferry Building and Gabbiano's Restaurant. BCDC 
has indicated that replacement seating must be provided, as well as reconfigured and 
improved lighting. Port staff feels that additional funds to design these improvements 
are justified. 

• Port Staff requests that the Consultant provide additional construction stage services for 
the project to ensure construction compliance with the contract documents. These 
additional services include extensive oversight of the promenade deck and breakwater 
pile driving activities, and new South Terminal float and ramp construction. 

• Port staff requests that the Consultant's contract be extended through the duration of the 
construction project to December 31, 1999. 

The estimated construction cost of the complete Downtown Ferry Terminal Project is approximately 
$17,000,000. Currently the Port has secured nearly $14,000,000 from State and Federal funding 
agencies, and applications for additional governmental funding are pending. The project will be bid using 
additive bid items to ensure that the final project is fully funded. 

To date, the cost of the consulting work, including construction stage services, is $ 1 ,0 1 7,759. Staff has 
met with the Consultant and negotiated a price of $246,595 to complete the additional tasks as listed 
above. With the approval of this contract amendment, the total consulting design project cost is 
$1,264,354, representing 7.44% of the estimated construction cost. The additional cost will be fully 
funded by outside sources, including Proposition 1 16 bond funds and a grant from the Federal Highway 
Administration's Transportation Enhancement Activities Program. The schedule for the expenditure of 
outside funds for this project requires that the design be completed by April, 1997. 

Prepared by: Cliff Jarrard, Chief Harbor Engineer 



I:\wp51\agd-dft4.jr 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 97-18 



WHEREAS, to date, Port staff, with the assistance of Roma Design Group ("Consultant"), has 
prepared approximately 90% of the contract documents for the Downtown Ferry 
Terminal Project; and 

WHEREAS, Port Staff requests that the Consultant perform additional Breakwater structural analyses 
to address the increased length of the breakwater structure and the varying soil 
conditions; and 

WHEREAS, Port Staff requests that the Consultant address additional boiler facility design issues 
resulting from recent existing condition discoveries; and 

WHEREAS, Port Staff requests that the Consultant revise the contract documents to include 
additional Ferry Plaza improvements to enhance passenger circulation; and 

WHEREAS, Port Staff requests that the Consultant increase the scope of construction stage services 
to more fully ensure construction compliance with the contract documents; and 

WHEREAS, Port Staff requests that the Consultant's contract be extended through the duration of the 
construction project to December 31, 1999; and 

WHEREAS, Port Staff has met with the consultant and negotiated a price of $246,595 to complete 
the additional tasks; and 

WHEREAS, the schedule for the expenditure of outside funds for this project dictates that design 
proceed uninterrupted to preserve the funding; then be it 

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby authorizes staff to approve the Fourth 
Amendment to Contract No. SA 3930045 with ROMA Design Group for $246,595. 



I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its meeting of 
February 25, 1997. 



Secretary 



I:\wp51\agd-dft4.jr 



) 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 

MEMORANDUM 

February 19, 1997 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 

FROM: Douglas F. Wong ^ 

Executive Director * 

SUBJECT: Authorization to award Contract 2622, "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit Project" 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: THAT THE COMMISSION AUTHORIZE STAFF TO 
AWARD CONTACT 2622, "PIER 48 BULKHEAD SEISMIC RETROFIT PROJECT," IN 
ACCORDANCE WITH THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION 

The Pier 48 bulkhead buildings incurred structural damage during the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. 
On January 14, 1997, the Port Commission authorized staff to advertise for competitive bids for 
Contract 2622, "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit Project." The retrofit contract includes the 
following work: driving new steel piles to support the concrete bulkhead exterior walls, pouring new 
concrete grade beams and structural slabs, jacking-up the existing exterior concrete walls, repairing the 
cracks in the existing exterior concrete walls, installing new steel braced frames and plywood roof 
diaphragm, and abating hazardous materials. 

On February 14, 1997, eight (8) bids were received. A Summary of Bids is attached. The lowest 
responsive bidder was West Bay Builders, Inc./D. Stewart Thompson, Inc., a Joint Venture, at a low 
bid of $1,151,515. D. Stewart Thompson, Inc. is a WBEfirm with 51% of the work. Staff has reviewed 
the bid documents and the Human Rights Commission has reviewed and agreed that the MBE/WBE 
subcontracting goals have been met. Staff recommends that the Commission authorize the award of 
Contract 2622 to West Bay Builders, Inc/D. Stewart Thompson, Inc. , a Joint Venture. It is also 
recommeded that the Commission authorize a 10% contingency for possible Type I contract 
modifications and that the Executive Director be authorized to accept the work after it is complete. It 
is anticipated that FEMA/OES will fund the entire cost of this contract. 

Prepared by Cliff Jarrard, Chief Harbor Engineer 
THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM 6B 



I:\wp51\agd-p48a.cj 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 97-19 

WHEREAS, Pier 48 bulkhead incurred structural damage during the 1989 Loma 
Prieta Earthquake; and 

WHEREAS, on January 14, 1997, the Port Commission authorized staff to advertise 
for competitive bids for Contract 2622; and 

WHEREAS, on February 14, 1997, eight (8) bids were received; and 

WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the bid documents and determined that the lowest 

responsive bidder is West Bay Builders, Inc./ D. Stewart Thompson, Inc., a 
Joint Venture; and 

WHEREAS, the Human Rights Commission has reviewed the bids and determined that 
this contractor has met the MBE/WBE subcontracting goals and that the 
contractor qualifies for the bid preference; and 

WHEREAS, it is anticipated that FEMA/OES will fund the entire cost of the seismic 
retrofit, now therefore be it 



RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby authorizes the award of 
Contract 2622, "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit Project," to West Bay 
Builders, Inc./D. Stewart Thompson, Inc., a Joint Venture at a cost of 
$1,151,515, and authorizes a 10% contingency for possible Type 1 contract 
modifications; and be it further 

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission authorizes the Executive Director to 
accept the work after it is complete. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of February 25, 1997. 



Secretary 



\wp5r.agd-p48a.cj 









• — 









) 



o 
u 

CO 

fcz 
< < 



3< 



OQi 



Eio 
_ fM 




•o 






o 




(/) 


o 
d 
o 


c 
e 
a 
O 


w 
c 
o 
O 


a. 
E 

TO 

I 


< 


s 

in 

in 


'E 

3 


is 


•o 


8 




a 


in 




CD 


K 


t 


if) 


2, 







«'oc 

"COO 

S2ra 
ra-fc a. 

o "5 
a>_ o 

= 2 ara 
Q-c » - 



B !? C m 



■Q = fc 
">= o 

«o; 

O E.C 
<D^3 o Q. 

ra — r E 

<E O-O 



Sv 

.Q 01 



OE 



II" 



in" O.S c -X ra iS o 
a> ■□ ra 5 " » c i: 

<" m ra « ^5 O Q 

^ ra _ » £-ra 

3iH!§*3 

ra*r . J2 © ra ^ 

hoc; <5^ o .^ 

J«Eo:».!!.SI 
£= ol " H'o cm 

t-o ra ra °-T3 ra w "~. 
I§ra-|?ra£g»* 

"c^a-Q-dira-S! 
t> < "'0'o- a ro > 5 n 

T3 u ®® ra o a>c ° 



£ 


m 


■o 


o 


s 


TS 


10 


,2 


< 


cr 


o 


+ 




a> 






to io 


Q. 


a> 


b E 


5 


S 


» aj 


u. 


s 

CO 




ID 
DC 


■o "O 




ra 


a m 


a. 
in 


i 


CO if) 


a> 




« ra 


ra 


a 


CO CO 


0- 


^n 


CO CO 


E 


X 


33 


3<d 


o o 


o 


O'o. 


H 1- 









f § 
a. u 



CD a> 



S" 8™ S" :8' S 10 S" 5 5| 

Q.Z Q.Z 0.Z D.Z 0.Z D.Z |- Q 

^ .■— c -c .— r *! c its ts .— c -S A -*- 



fE?l?E~E 



g IS 



CO 03 ^ 

■2 ■? 'S 



2- 9 % °> 

1UO0. 





8 


8 


o 
o 


b 
o 


o 
o 


Q 
o 


o 


b 
o 


b 
o 


o 
p 


o 

o 


o 

CO 


o 
in 


c> 


i 


8 


b 


in 


o 


o 

CO 


fe 


8 


o 
o 


8 


o 

a 


CM 
CO 

cm" 


CM 


6 
o 






o 

o 


CO 




^ 


CO 

k" 

CO 


5 

in 


CM 

co 


I" 


n" 




2 T 


C 


CO 


y> 




» 








bO 


» 


Tf 


in 


(a 


o 








*» 














o 


o 


< 


H 




f» 










| 








CN 


CN 


ofl 


1 1 




1 






j 












V>- 


V* 






























O 
















i 












c 




























.9 co 

1 < c° 




| 
























|L 


o 




o 


o 


o 


m 


h 


o 


o 


o 




5J°" o 


o 


p. 

o 


o 


w 


h~ 


^r 


o 


3) 


3> 


3 




1 1 5 ? «q JS 


o 


m 


t^ 


r- 


CO 


CO 


O 


O 


O 




o> 


o 




CO 


CM 


^r 


CO 


N 


N 


n 




Ruiz Co 

615 Cortl 

F ,CA9 

415) 647 

Unit 11 

Price 

$9;7 


1 


o 
b 
o 

CO 

5 


cn 
co" 
cy» 


e» 


tfr 


v> 




¥> 


W> 


LO 




< «- CO ~" 
























8 


o 


b 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


O 


O 


O 


oil on 


p 


o 


o 


o 


o 






O 


O 


O ; 


o o 


> 


8 


o 

o 


^r 


in 


o 
o 


o 
o 


o 
o 


o 

LO 




o 

o 


o 

o 


otii cnu 

ID to 

Cf)ll COl 

oil COl 




o 


p 


o 


o> 


TT 


o 


01 


r~- 


3 


3 


^ , 




*-" 


K-" 




CO 


cm 


o 


CM 


co 


N 


o 


■M 


» S 






CO 




en 


s 


I-- 


T— 


*0 


■NJ 


"M 


o ™ 


o 


r 


» 


en 


b9 


» 


» 


e» 




» 


» 


» 


in 


to 

mi 


§ 55 


t- 
























T- 


T-| 


























V* 


i*\ 


° « 
















! 










i 


























;l 


i 5 " ii 










i 












l 1! 



° s ' T 2 «>R 

fe ° - lo = r* 


o 


o 


^1 


CO 


CM 


CO 


CM 


H» 


r«r 


o 






P 


o 


O) 


G» 


V> 


60 


eo 




» 


D 




r- 


CM 


CO 








' 










» 


CD 

cn 


» 


















1 P ": 5 

^ in w — 
















| 








o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


O 


o 


O 




Oi 
O. 

in 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


P 


O 


o 


o 


o 


LO 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


b 


b 


in 


o 


o 


o 




o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


3 


<o 


o 


o 


Oi 


CO 


CO 


LO 


cn 


CO 


o 


3 


CO 


CO 


CM 


CO 




CO 


CD 


CO 


CO 


CM 


*r 


ip.- 


» 


w 


CM 


CO 




LO 


t^ 


CO 


r-- 


'■ CM 


CN 




CO 


f~ 




n 




(A 


tf> 








te 


» 








f p 




t*y 






B» 


m 


eo 








f 




















1 


^ 


T-| 


















1 




*» 


«A 


E 














i 






; 






<D 


























o> 


















| 








a 


























c 


























(0 


























5 a> 


























5 5 o 
o < ^ o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


t> 


3 




o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 




p 


3 




u 2 ^ 5 e 


o 


o 


LO 


,- 


CM 


o 


CD 


CO 


CM 


3 




j e r o in o 
i E Joj oto 


o 


o 


CO 


CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 


e» 


>r 


3 




o 


o 




(/> 


&9 


y> 


b9 




ee in 




w a> en , ~- -j- 


CO 


CM 


CO 












» 







C W IN 

O O < CM 

> o "^ 

1 5 u. r S ' 
S 2 c/) S 



o 




ii 










o 


o 

CO 




c 










o 
o 


>o 




J= 










*» 


or z 




c 
o 

<) 












<5 












ol 


5 K 




o 










K 


fer 
















3 < 




CD 




LO 








CO (0 




CD 










9ft 


o 
o 


C 
LU 
U 



CD 

CL 


0> 

< 

c 
E 


< 

o 

m 


a 

o 
cn 
cn 






COt- 

ne 

o 

0- 


to 

_i 


o 
o 
b 

R8 




cc 


o 


o 

z 


O 

c 

CD 


m 


c 






o 


■a 

c 


o 
cn 


CO 

o 


_) 






i: 


< 




</> 


-i- 







*- v- tN 



!.§■ 



» a 



. O O) 

WOC 

■CBO 

2J15 
«» Q. 

o ° 

o>_ o 

*- £ co *- 

5 c <n"D 

2-s o c 

12 ex CO 
O.C !£ - 
•COT) S 
O O CO 



T> C 
CO CO 

S in 
»- CO 



o.gco 



i C CD 



E03 



§-q: 



c w> 

aj m 

(D CD 



gora « 
w c ® 



I 



« ° « 
— P * 
o E-c: 

„ CO — u) 

c' D co 

"> o>', . 5 

EC- w 3 

■= C o 

CO T3 o CL 

5 9 ra o 



(CO 




cn 


■n 


Q) 











„ 


O 


a 


h 






a) 


"D 


fc 


F 


n 


<g 






< 


o 



- w -. d P ' 

-S T3 2 co s "° c : 
2« ro o£-ci"| 

8g2™£8^^ 

^"Sqoo-co; 

> -a 9 £ roSo ° 
co co « Sc »8 

C- "O CO CO O-tj CD 

o c Q.i_ ctcr 

C CO uj CO c CO — 

c aw E^ O.S 

O 3 fO -c S 3 ° 

y5 CD"DTJ-n CO > 
3 CD CO CO r: 0) fO 

tjTj^JB ra o a 



S5 



O Q. 

£E 
=. ° 

S O 



ii o 



o c 

o£ 

^ CO 
ID -Q 
CC ™ 

o ro 

Eaj 



CD 



CO 



01 p c 

CO <= ~ 



co J2 o 



CO 



CD 



Cc-g-CD 
= X <" 

< CD W 



n 


lO 


LO 


O 


o 

lO 


CO 




E 


a> 


u> 


LO 


o 


CN 




CM 


T 


■T 


CO 






0) 
















































-o 
















m 












T3 




0) 


3= 




«r 






O 




> 


0) 




CD 




,o 


15 




TJ 










<D 


S 




■o 


<D 




CD 




0J 


o 




< 


a. 


cr 


Q. 




cr 


<D 




+ 


c 
o 


ra 


C 

o 


- 




X 

tD 


(A 


CO 


m 


c 


ro 


£ 


CL 


O) 


E 


E 


n 


CD 


"S 


0) 


S 


'■6 




0) 

4-1 


















c 


(/>" 


c 


3 


<D 


CD 


■o 


■a 


a 


Q) 

5. 


'5. 




CD 


T3 
CD 


cd m 


m 


"© 


ai 


a. 


a 


JZ 


» 


0) 


"c7> 


© 


a) 


c 


CD 


~5 


n 


CO 


CD 




ai 


o 






CD CD 


















Q> 


a) 


<D 




a. 








t 

ca 

T3 


b 

CO 
T3 


b 
CD 
T3 




c 

(D 

E 

CD 




to t/ 

5 2 






to 


'5 


3® 


o 


O 



*W /t\ ni n\ n\ 






O O 5. 

CD' - ©CM q)CO cD^" 0)^ ojlfl Cr 

o oo O U U ^J ^", 

■C O g O -c O ~ O ~ O 'c o ., S ■- 

O-ZCLZCLZO-ZCLZCLZ | - 

= E?E?E?E?F = 1 '' 



o < 



— — -So 



2 .£ a 
o o _ 
z z ■= 



. 



s* 



CD CD * 

O 






£ £ S S 
a. o a a. 



O 
O 

to 

>-o 

l g 
I- 

(0 co 

rx 
O 

0_ 



ta 
o 
cc 



2 rt 

ID 

0C 
u 

'E 

CA 
CD 
CO 

CD CM 
S CM 

3 
CO 



CD — 

a. o 



Pacific Constnjction 
928A Van Ness Ave. 
S.F..CA 94109 
(415) 567-1712 


z 

o 

z 






































> 


> 

to 

ID 

> 


i 

i I 


> 


> 


> 


> 


> 


< 


< 

z 


>- 


> 


>- 


> 


> 


>- 


>■ 


Bames/LTM 
449 10th St. 
S.F., CA 94103 
(415)552-7070 


z 

o 

z 


I 1 

I 




























n 

CD 

ZC? 
CD'S 
CD 

w 

Z 


> 

to 

ID 

> 


>-j>-!>-j>-l>-!>-|:>->- 

I ; i 


> 


< 

■z. 


< 

-z. 


> 


>■ 


> 


> 


> 


> 


> 


Trico Constnjction 
445C Hampshire St. 
S.F., CA94110 
(415) 552-8439 


z 

o 

z 


! ! ' 

■ : i 

] ; 

| 




■ 


I 














CM 

a> 
o 

z 

CD 
CD 
CO 

z 


> 

to 

O) 

> 


1 
| 1 

1 ! 

>- >- >- >> : >- ; >i>-!> 


<l<l-s_ 


> 


> 


> 


> 


> 


>■ 


West Bay Builders/ 

D. Stewart Thompson Inc., JV 

615 Lindaro St., San Rafael, CA 94123 

(415)456-8972 


Z 

o 

Z 


i 

| ! 1 

i i ! 
■ i < i i 






I 

! 


i 


! 




> 

in 
CD 


1 ; ■ i 

i 

: i 


i I . ■ 

i 


>• 




c 

CD 

E 

3 
O 
O 
O 


O CM V t-'0:0!t-' Oi vi CM' CO' >»i 
O O O t- CM CO CO! 0)0)0)01 
CO CO CO »:» »i» Tf 1 Tf Tt ; V Tt 

o o o o o o o o o o o o 

O O O O O O O OIOIOIO lol 


'I 

H 




to 

i 

o 

Q- 
CD 

'5 

CT 
CD 

cc 


CO 


Addenda Acknowledgement 
Schedule of Bid Prices 
Schedule of Unit Prices 

Bid Bond 
Experience & Financial Qualifications 
List of Subcontractors 
Non-Collusion Certification 
HRC Form 1 

HRC Schedule A (as applic, by 5pm) 
HRC Schedule L (as applic, by 5pm) 
HRC Form 2A 
HRC Form 2B 
Apprenticeship Program 
Business Tax Reg Declaration 


Highest General Prevailing Wage 
Equal Opp EmpI & Bus Practices: LD 
MacBride Principles 


z 

^ 
i 

•Oil 

1 

UJ 

£11 

on 
>ll 

8 

811 

ton 

ID 

rr 

TJll 
CD 

E; : 
ml 
CDi 

Q 



S »-" 



ID x^ w " " « 



2 2^"'^° 



>lw UJ UJ uj ^ w _ 
= iuicocpco> > > 



if 



CD CD 

E E 



£ £ % 



II 



€ 



CO <j> 



CI] CD * 

"" -o o 



£ 



0. (J Q 0. 



5 CD 



o 
u 

co 

>-o 

(0(0 

O 

0- 



CO 

c 
III 

o 

a 

e o 1 

0) 

K 






a — 
a. o 



A. Ruiz Construction Co. & Assoc.. Inc. 

1615 Cortland Ave. 
S.F., CA94110 
(415)647-4010 


Z 

o 

Z 


! 

1 
1 


































> 

i 


> 


>~l> 


> 


> 


> 


>■ 


>- 


> 


>- 


< 


< 

Z 


> 


> 


> 


> 


> 


>- 


> 


5 
8 «" 

g CO 


z 

o 

z 


















i 
I 
I 

I 
i 
















i 

! 
i 

> 

i 


Valentine Corpor 
5 Thomas Mellon 
S.F..CA 94134 
(415)467-7700 


> 

>- 


t I 

J 

1 f 


>- 


>- 


> 


> 


> 


< 
2 


i 

4" 


> 


> 


> 


> 


> 


> 


o 
O 

c 

V 

E 

0) 
CD 
(0 

c 

(0 

5 oi 


z 

o 

z 


! 
i 












i 

! 

! i 
i 














j! 
I 

i 
I 

i 


M.H. Constructor 
1418 Yosemite A 
S.F., CA 94124 
(415)822-8891 


> 

> 


! ! 1 ! i 1 1 

1 I 

LrLr 

>- >:>-!>-j>-|>.|>-l>-i>-|^!§ |> 

! ! ! 

ill 


> 


>- 


> 


> 


> 


! 
i 


Engineering Constr., Inc. 
95054 


z 

o 

z 


Mil! 1 ! ! 

i i ■ I i : ! 

ill ! 

i 


08 

M 

o 

ZCM 

0> 

O 
CO 


Anderson Pacific 
1390 Norman Ave 
Santa Clara, CA 
(408)970-9900 


> 

ID 
> 


>- > >>>>>>>££>->i> >>>> 




% 

c 

1U 

E 

o 
o 

D 


o cm <ti^- o:o t- oi'- cm'co f! 
o o Or- cm co oo co ' cn cn cn cn i 

CO CO CO ^- *** ^'^" ^- ^ *or ^ '^*l 

o o o o o o o oo o o o 

o o o o o o o o o o o o 


c^- 




V) 

E 
o 

U- 
T3 

<D 

'5 

CT 

<D 


!Bid 

Addenda Acknowledgement 
Schedule of Bid Prices 
Schedule of Unit Prices 

Bid Bond 
Experience & Financial Qualifications 
List of Subcontractors 
Non-Collusion Certification 
HRC Form 1 

HRC Schedule A (as applic, by 5pm) 
HRC Schedule L (as applic, by 5pm) 
HRC Form 2A 
HRC Form 2B 
Apprenticeship Program 
Business Tax Reg Declaration 
Highest General Prevailing Wage 
Equal Opp EmpI & Bus Practices: LD 
MacBride Principles 


z!i 

Si 

ol' 

x: 

°0 
c 
o> 
c: 
LU 
>. 
a 
a> 
> 
'« 
c 
o 
a. 
cn 
a> 
DC 

■o 

d> 

E 

01 

<D 

Q 






^ ^ £ £ s ^ 



ElS 

C. Oi Q. 

n\ a. 
CD re 



CO UJ LU uj ^_ 

LU OQ CO m > > > 

z ■* 

LU 
K 



i| 

a> a> 
E E 



5 - 5 



■g -g 
□ b 



1- CM 
<U 0) 



~ .2 Q. 



* 






PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMORANDUM 



February 25, 1997 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 

Douglas F. Wong fof^/W/" 
Executive Director 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



SUBJECT: Briefing and Public Hearing on the Draft Concept Agreement between the 
Port of San Francisco, BCDC and Save San Francisco Bay Association regarding public 
access and urban design improvements and BCDC regulatory amendments to be achieved 
through implementation of the Waterfront Land Use Plan. 

I. SUMMARY 

The Port of San Francisco has been conducting a public planning process to develop the 
Waterfront Land Use Plan ("Waterfront Plan") for all properties under its jurisdiction. As 
part of that effort, the Port entered into an Agreement with the Bay Conservation and 
Development Commission ("BCDC") in 1996 to jointly review the Waterfront Plan in the 
context of existing BCDC plan policies. The Agreement identified a number of specific 
issues for discussion, including: 1) reviewing and classifying pier repairs which constitute 
substantial repair and therefore are considered fill, versus routine maintenance; 2) possible 
amendments to replacement fill policies to allow further flexibility in reconfiguration of 
piers; 3) nature and duration of interim uses on piers; approaches to allow rehabilitation of 
bulkhead buildings for existing or future non- water-oriented uses; streamlining of the permit 
process, combining to the maximum extent review by the Port, City and BCDC; and 
developing proposed amendments to BCDC's Special Area Plan. Pursuant to that 
Agreement, the Port and BCDC staff met to develop proposals to resolve these issues. At 
the invitation of BCDC, Save San Francisco Bay Association (Save the Bay) joined these 
discussions. 



The three parties jointly developed a Draft Concept Agreement ("Concept Agreement"), 
which describes in conceptual terms how the issues would be resolved. The Concept 
Agreement describes commitments that would be made by the Port to 1) develop major new 
waterfront public access and open space, 2) remove specified piers, 3) create a funding 
mechanism for public access improvements, 4) provide on-site public access in new 

THIS PRINT CONVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 7A 



Page 2 

developments, and 5) conduct further historic preservation studies to determine which 
historic resources will be preserved. Under the Concept Agreement, BCDC would amend 
the Bay Plan, Special Area Plan and Total Design Plan to incorporate new or revised policies 
which describe 1) how piers may be reconfigured, and 2) a clear definition of what 
constitutes substantial repairs versus basic maintenance on piers, based on their physical 
condition, which allows the Port more flexibility for leasing and use of its facilities; 3) 
defines "maximum feasible public access" for new development projects on finger piers as 
25% of pier area rather than the current approach of determining public access on a case-by- 
case basis (public access on larger piers would be determined through a joint design review 
process conducted by the Port, BCDC and the City); 4) does not require public access for 
leases or uses of existing facilities, except for those leases which generate a substantial 
increase in the need for public access, in light of the Port's commitment to major new 
plazas and funding. In addition, the Concept Agreement proposes the creation of a Joint 
Design Review Committee to streamline the review of waterfront projects by the Port, 
BCDC and the City. 

The Port and BCDC staff will continue to invite public review and comments on the Draft 
Concept Agreement. The staff also will seek direction from their respective Commissions, 
at a joint BCDC and Port Commission briefing and public hearing included on the agenda 
for BCDC's regular meeting on March 6, 1997, to develop further detailed policies and 
procedures to carry out the Concept Agreement provisions. In addition, the staff will jointly 
propose that the respective commitments by the Port and BCDC be documented in a binding 
agreement, prior to the Port Commission's adoption of the final Waterfront Land Use Plan, 
and BCDC's adoption of the Bay Plan amendments. It is anticipated that the Port 
Commission will adopt the final Waterfront Plan in April, and later approve the San 
Francisco Special Area Plan to be incorporated into BCDC's Bay Plan. It is anticipated that 
BCDC will adopt the Bay Plan (including the Special Area Plan) amendments in July 1997. 



II. BACKGROUND 

A. The Waterfront Land Use Plan 

The Draft Waterfront Plan (Waterfront Plan) sets forth policies define land uses for the 
waterfront, from Fisherman's Wharf to India Basin. The overall goal of the Waterfront Plan 
is to reunite the waterfront with the City by providing for the Port's current and long-term 
maritime needs while also identifying opportunities for open space, public access and 
activities which attract the public to use and enjoy the waterfront, and generate revenues to 
support its public trust objectives. The Waterfront Plan is the product of a five year public 
planning process, recommended by the Waterfront Plan Advisory Board. With few 
exceptions, the Port Commission approved the Advisory Board's recommended plan for 
analysis in an Environmental Impact Report, which was certified by the Planning 
Commission on January 9, 1997. 



Page 3 



B. The Urban Design and Public Access Element 

One of the key Port Commission amendments to the Draft Plan called for the development 
of urban design guidelines to ensure that new development under the Waterfront Plan occurs 
in a manner which enhances the waterfront. Toward that end, the Port created a Technical 
Advisory Committee (TAC) to review and advise the development of an Urban Design and 
Public Access (UDPA) element of the Waterfront Plan. The TAC is made up of members of 
the design profession, and representatives from the Planning Department, BCDC staff, 
Waterfront Plan Advisory Board, and Save the Bay. The TAC has met periodically with 
BCDC's Design Review Board to exchange ideas and comments regarding the development 
of the design guidelines. 

The UDPA element will define a comprehensive urban design vision which identifies 
locations and types of public access, open space areas and views, historic preservation 
policies, and architectural standards, which will be realized as waterfront development 
projects occur. The UDPA will be incorporated into the Waterfront Plan or otherwise 
adopted such that its implementation occurs, as applicable, as part of new waterfront 
projects. 

C. BCDC/Port/Save the Bay Concept Agreement . 

In addition to developing the Urban Design and Public Access element, the Port entered into 
an Agreement with BCDC. 1 Under the Agreement, BCDC and the Port are to jointly review 
the Waterfront Plan in the context of existing BCDC plan policies, and develop mutually 
agreeable amendments to the Waterfront Plan, and BCDC's Bay Plan, and San Francisco 
Special Area and Total Design Plans, consistent with the McAteer-Petris Act. The Port and 
BCDC agree that resolution of these policy and regulatory issues will enable both agencies 
to realize their ultimate objectives more effectively than under current policies and 
regulations. BCDC's stated objectives are to 1) revitalize the San Francisco waterfront; 2) 
provide maximum feasible public access; and 3) reduce Bay fill. The Port shares those 
objectives. In addition, the Port seeks to increase developer certainty and streamline 
BCDC's project review process by establishing clear definitions and requirements for 
waterfront projects subject to BCDC permitting authority, and establishing a single joint 
design review process which integrates review by the Port, BCDC and the City. 

BCDC and the Port have met intensively to discuss the issues stated in the Agreement, as 
well as to exchange ideas and develop a consensus about an urban design vision for the San 
Francisco waterfront. At the request of BCDC, these discussions were joined by Save the 
Bay. The three parties jointly propose recommendations which address each of these areas, 
as presented in Attachment A, Draft Concept Agreement Among the Port of San Francisco. 



Agreement Between the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission and the Port of San Francisco to Review Port 
Plans and Policies Implementing the San Francisco Waterfront Plan as well as Possible Amendments to the San Francisco Ba> Plan. 
Special Area Plan. Total Desian Plan, and Other Documents. Port Commission Resolution # 96-02. March 25. 1996. 



I 



Page 4 



the Save San Francisco Bav Association, and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and 
Development Commission . The goals of the Concept Agreement are as follows: 

• Complete the Urban Design/Public Access element of the Waterfront Plan (the 

"UDPA") consistent with the Concept Agreement. The UDPA will describe urban 
design guidelines for the waterfront including but not limited to the location of 
significant views and vistas, location of open water, new public access concepts, new 
public plazas and overall design. 

Provide for the removal of piers to create more open water. 

Provide for the creation of new public plazas on the waterfront 

Improve the design, location, and amount of public access on piers. 

Develop new rules for replacement fill and pier reconstruction or reconfiguration. 

Develop new rules governing land uses on existing piers. 

Develop means to protect historic resources on the waterfront. 

Improve permit processing including the creation of a Joint Port/B CDC/City Design 
Review Committee to help streamline permit processing for new projects on the 
waterfront. 

The Draft Concept Agreement recommendations are presented for public review and 
comment. In addition to public hearings scheduled before the Port and BCDC 
Commissions, BCDC and Port staff will be meeting with community organizations to solicit 
public input, to determine whether the Concept Agreement proposals should be modified or 
refined. 

III. NEXT STEPS 

The Draft Concept Agreement describes in conceptual terms how to achieve the above 
objectives. In order to implement the Concept Agreement provisions, as modified in 
response to public comments, further details and procedures need to be developed. It is 
anticipated that the detailed provisions will be in the form of revisions to the Port's 
Waterfront Plan and Urban Design and Public Access element, and BCDC's amendments to 
the Bay Plan, Special Area Plan and Total Design Plan. 

Given that the process to approve the Waterfront Plan and BCDC plan amendments must 
occur in sequence rather than as an integrated package, the Port and BCDC staff jointly 
recommend that the respective commitments by both agencies described in the Concept 



. 



Page 5 



Agreement also be included in a binding agreement, approved by the Port and BCDC 
Commissions, prior to the adoption of the final Waterfront Plan by the Port Commission. 
This will provide assurance to the Port Commission that its approval of the public access 
and other commitments, per the Concept Agreement, will be followed up by BCDC approval 
of the Bay Plan amendments regarding permitted uses, definitions and other BCDC 
commitments set forth in the Concept Agreement. It is anticipated that the Port Commission 
will also approve the San Francisco Special Area Plan which will be incorporated into the 
BCDC Bay Plan. 

In addition to the Port Commission briefing on the Concept Agreement on February 25th, 
there will be a joint Port and BCDC Commission briefing and public hearing on this subject 
scheduled on BCDC's regular meeting of March 6, 1997. At that time, the Port and BCDC 
staff will seek direction from their respective Commissions to proceed with developing the 
further definitions and procedures to implement the Concept Agreement, including 
preparation of the binding agreement, and amendments to the Waterfront Plan, Urban 
Design and Public Access element, Bay Plan, Special Area Plan and Total Design Plan. 
Together, these policies will define the design standards and regulatory framework for new 
waterfront development projects; each individual project will be reviewed for compliance 
with these rules. 

It is anticipated that the Port Commission will consider adoption of the final Waterfront Plan 
in April, and that the Bay Conservation and Development Commission will consider 
adoption of the Bay Plan amendments (inclusive of the Special Area and Total Design Plans) 
in July 1997. 



Prepared by: Paul Osmundson, Director 

Planning and Development Division 



h:\oshima\bcdcnego\jtrept 






4 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



February 25, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 
Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 



FROM: Douglas F. Wong 

Executive Director 



*>£ 



SUBJECT: Travel Authorization for the Executive Director to Participate in the 

Mayor's Goodwill and Friendship Mission to China March 31-April 12, 
1997 



The Executive Director requests approval to travel to Asia with the Mayor from March 3 1 
through April 12, 1997. Meetings will be held with several shipping lines and terminal 
operators to pursue business opportunities.. 

The itinerary as scheduled is as follows: 



March 31- 


April 4 


Shanghai 


April 4 


April 6 


Beijing 


April 6 


April 9 


Hong Kong 


April 9 


April 12 


Taipei 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 11A 



€ 



4 



< 



Estimated costs of the trip are: 

Participation Fee $ 5,000.00 

Airfare 6,099.00 

Hotel (included in Airfare) 
Ground Transportation (included in Airfare 
Meals (included in Airfare) 

Other 100.00 

Total $11,199.00 



Prepared by: Benjamin A. Kutnick 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 22=15 



WHEREAS, 
WHEREAS, 
RESOLVED, 



The Executive Director is requesting authorization to travel to 
Asia to develop business opportunities; and 

The estimated cost of this trip is included in the Port Commission 
budget; and therefore, be it 

that the Port Commission hereby approves this travel request. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of February 25, 1997. 



Secretary 



«l 



t 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



TO: 



MEMORANDUM 

February 18, 1997 

MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



FROM: Douglas Wong 

Executive Director 

SUBJECT: Approval of Travel Authorization for One Port Representative to Travel to 
Oxnard, California to attend the West Coast Conference on Contaminated 
Soils and Groundwater, March 10-14, 1997, in accordance with the Port's 
Fiscal Year 1996-1997 Budget. 

The Port is currently undertaking several major projects involving assessment and 
remediation of contaminated soil and groundwater. The technical information provided 
at the West Coast Conference on Contaminated Soils and Groundwater, sponsored by the 
U.S. Navy and the Association for the Environmental Health of Soils, will assist the 
Port's Project Manager in effectively managing the underground storage tank site 
investigation, soils and groundwater characterization, and dumpsite closure/groundwater 
monitoring projects for which she is currently responsible. The conference includes four 
days of technical presentations, and three evening hands-on workshops dedicated to 
developing participants' skills in specific contaminant evaluation tasks. The conference 
offers an exceptionally good discount for government employees. 



The estimated cost for the trip is as follows: 
Registration 
Transportation 
Lodging 
Per Diem 
Total 



$ 275 
$ 175 
$ 534 
$ 152 
$1,136 



These funds are available for expenditure in the Port's FY 96-97 budget. 



Prepared by: Carol Bach, Project Manager, Environmental Health and Safety Section 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 11B 



€1 



♦ 



3 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-17 



WHEREAS, 



the Executive Director is requesting travel authorization for one 
Port representative to attend the West Coast Conference on 
Contaminated Soils and Groundwater in Oxnard, California on 
March 10 through 14, 1997; and 



WHEREAS, 



the costs of this trip have been included in the Port Commission's 
Fiscal Year 1996-1997 budget, now therefore, be it 



RESOLVED, 



that the Port Commission hereby approved this travel request. 



/ hereby certify that the forgoing resolution was adopted by the San Francisco Port 
Commission at its meeting of February 25, 1997. 



} 



Secretary 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



MEMORANDUM 



February 19, 1997 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco. CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James R. Herman 



FROM: 



Douglas F. Wong j'Cf ,.■ tyj 
Executive Director 



SUBJECT: Approval of Lease No. L-12419 with S&C Ford of San Francisco at Pier 50, 
Shed C (Terry Francois Boulevard and Mission Rock Street). 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE LEASE WITH S&C FORD OF SAN 
FRANCISCO 

BACK GROUND 

S&C Ford of San Francisco approached the Port with a request to lease 66,000 square feet of 
shed space in Shed C at Pier 50 to receive, store, prepare, clean and deliver new automobiles, 
vans, and trucks. The shed space would be modified at the tenant's expense to accommodate 
the proposed use. A water retention basin would be installed to prevent runoff of wash water 
into the Bay. Demising would be provided by the tenant. 

Shed C at Pier 50 has been vacant since the termination by Western Rim of its lease in 1995. 
Since then the Shed C facility has been used intermittently for film industry storage, set 
construction and film shoots. The Shed has been vacant for over four months. S&C Ford will 
occupy 66,000 square feet of this 90,000 square foot facility. Port staff proposes to lease the 
balance of the shed to Westar Marine Services, a tug, barge and water taxi operator, Royal 
Charter Marine a maritime chandlery, and American Airporter, three Port tenants that will be 
displaced by the Ballpark project. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 11C 



Agenda Item No. 1 1 C 
Page 2 



Proposed Lease 

A lease (Port Lease No. L- 124 19) has been negotiated with S&C Ford by the Port Real Estate 
and Asset Management staff on the following terms and conditions: 

1 . Premises : 66,000 square feet of space in Shed C at Pier 50; 

2. Term : Four (4) years commencing on April 15, 1997; 

3. Rent : $19,800 per calendar month ($.30 per square foot) 

The Port Commission approved minimum rental rate parameter for open shed space 
over 10,000 square feet in the Southern Waterfront is $.30 per square foot. In addition 
to the shed space, S&C Ford will have access to and control over the fenced yard area 
immediately adjacent to the Shed C premises; 

4. Rent Commencement Date : June 15, 1997. This will allow two months for S&C Ford 

to complete its tenant improvements build-out prior to rent 
commencement; 



Security Deposit: 



6. Tenant Improvements: 



Maintenance: 



The proposed lease waives the Port's standard security 
deposit requirement, so long as the tenant is not in default 
of the payment of rent. Any failure to pay any rents 
within 15 days of the due date will result in a requirement 
that the tenant deliver the standard Security Deposit to the 
Port automatically and without notice. The security 
deposit would be $39,600.00; 

S&C Ford will be responsible for all demising inside the 
Shed C premises and construction of all improvements 
required by S&C Ford as a result of its use of the 
premises. The Port will restore the restrooms to operating 
condition, deliver the premises in broom clean condition, 
replace any defective lighting, relocate a fence and gate on 
the premises exterior and redirect outside lighting. 

The Port will agree to maintain the roof and exterior 
walls. All other items of repair and maintenance rest with 
S&C Ford. 



Prepared by: V. Fei Tsen, Director, Real Estate & Asset Management 



t 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-20 



WHEREAS, 



Charter Section B3.581 empowers the Port Commission with the power 
and duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and 
control the Port area of San Francisco; and 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



RESOLVED, 



under Charter Section B3.581 leases granted or made by the Port 
Commission shall be administered exclusively by the operating forces of 
the Port Commission; and 

S&C Ford of San Francisco proposes to lease 66,000 square feet of shed 
space at Pier 50 Shed C to operate a new car, van and truck storage and 
dealer preparation facility; and 

staff has negotiated all the terms and conditions of a proposed lease with 
S&C Ford of San Francisco on the terms and conditions outlined in the 
Memorandum to the Port Commission for Agenda Item 11C for the Port 
Commission meeting of February 25, 1997; now therefore, be it 

that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby approves entering into 
Lease No. L- 124 19 between the Port and S&C Ford of San Francisco on 
the terms and conditions outlined in the Memorandum to the Port 
Commission for Agenda Item 11C for their February 25, 1997 meeting, 
and authorizes the Executive Director of the Port, or his designee, to 
execute the same on behalf of the Port, in such form as is approved by 
the City Attorney. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of February 25, 1997. 



Secretary 



I:\WP51\S&CFORD.MEM\ND\jef\February 19, 1997 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



FEBRUARY 25, 1997 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

HON. MICHAEL HARDEMAN, PRESIDENT 
HON. DENISE McCARTHY, VICE PRESIDENT 
HON. FRANKIE G. LEE 
HON. PRESTON COOK 
HON. JAMES HERMAN 



DOUGLAS F. WONG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING 
FEBRUARY 25, 1997 

1. ROLL CALL 

The meeting was called to order by Commission President Michael Hardeman at 4:32 
p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Michael Hardeman, Denise McCarthy, 
Frankie Lee, Preston Cook and James Herman. 

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 1 1 , 1997 Special Meeting & Regular Meeting 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the minutes of the special 
meeting were adopted. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the minutes of the regular 
meeting were adopted. 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. The Executive Director requested that Item 7A be heard first, due to time constraint. 
He then introduced and welcomed Mr. Will Travis, Executive Director of BCDC. 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. Briefing and Public Hearing on the Draft Concept Agreement between the Port of San 
Francisco. BCDC and Save San Francisco Bay Association regarding public access 
and urban design improvements and BCDC regulatory amendments to be achieved 
through implementation of the Waterfront Land Use Plan. 

Mr. Will Travis, Executive Director of BCDC, indicated that they are looking 
forward to having a joint meeting of both Commissions on March 6 at the Pier 35 
Cruise Ship Terminal. Staffs from both Commissions look forward to hearing 
comments from the public and the Commissions. 

Mrs. Jane Morrison encouraged the Commission to pursue the concept agreement. 
She liked the idea that some of the piers will be removed so that there will be more 
open views of the water. She would like to be sure that this agreement is signed, 
agreed upon and take effect. She thinks it's a good idea to have a Design Review 
Committee that would expedite the permit process but wanted to ensure that this is not 
a reflection of bending or ignoring of rules that protect the public interest of the 
waterfront. There should be more maritime and water related activities on Port land. 



M022597.igq 



-1- 



Louise Bea, representing the Dolphin Club, indicated that the Dolphin Club and South 
end Club represent over 100 years of rich history of bay swimming. Their clubs are 
open to the public. After reading the memorandum, she noticed that there was no 
reference to water quality and requested that it be included in the concept agreement. 

Ms. Ellen Johnck, Executive Director of Bay Planning Coalition, stated that the 
process is important. The coalition endorses the agreement. She briefly described the 
coalition's role in representing the Port's interest as well as the maritime industry. 
Two years ago, there was a proposal from the Governor's office to erase the budget 
for BCDC. Save San Francisco Bay approached Bay Planning Coalition and entered 
into a collaboration about the need to save BCDC to retain its budget. As part of their 
collaboration, they agreed that BCDC is an important organization for balancing the 
economic interest and environment in the bay as well as promote orderly development 
around the shoreline. Save San Francisco Bay and Bay Planning agreed that what was 
needed was a comprehensive overhaul of BCDC s regulations, particularly with 
routine maintenance and repair. They agreed to the common goals and worked 
together to reach an agreement whereby a substantial number of recommendations for 
reform in this area would go forward. Their report was published and a copy will be 
provided to the Commission for their review. She suggested that the best way for the 
Port to achieve its goals would be to work specifically on the Waterfront Plan with 
BCDC and Save San Francisco Bay. She stated that, on the basis of the agreement, 
the Port is now ready to go forward with a general permit for repair and maintenance 
of the piers. 

Ms. Nan Roth, member of the Watefront Advisory Board (WFAB) and a member of 
the Fisherman's Wharf Citizens Advisory Committee, addressed a couple of issues 
regarding the proposal. While she thinks that the Port has much to gain from the 
proposal she questioned some of the "give backs" to the community. She's concerned 
about the area around Pier 35. She's pleased that the number of ships has increased in 
the past couple of years. She feels strongly that the future outlook of cruise business 
in San Francisco is good. However, the proposal does not protect the future of the 
cruise terminal. She would like to hear how the cruise terminal will be expanded if it 
needs more space to dock ships. The proposal for a park around Pier 23 would 
require displacing some maritime tenants. The WFAB's intent is to do everything it 
could to retain maritime presence and hopes the Commission would do the same. The 
triangle parking lot at Fisherman's Wharf was originally proposed as part of the 
Fisherman's Wharf area plan but the plan is different from the Port's proposal. The 
community should have an opportunity to discuss those differences and the 
Fisherman's Wharf situation in general. 

Ms. Diane Oshima, Port & Development staff, indicated that the main purpose of 
having a meeting today is to provide an extra opportunity for public comments. She 
also introduced Marc Holmes, negotiator representing Save the Bay. The positive and 
constructive relationships formed with BCDC and Save the Bay are instrumental and 
important to Port staff. The concept agreement is an important milestone. 

There are provisions that the Port would have to commit to provide the following 



M022597.igq 



public plaza: 

(1) The Fisherman's Wharf Plaza which is on the triangle parking lot site (Seawalls 
Lot 300 and 301) - approximately 70% of the area will be developed as a plaza and 
30% for development such as a market hall or festive commercial type of use 
compatible with the plaza to generate the revenues necessary to finance the 
development of the plaza. Staff will work with the Fisherman's Wharf community to 
develop details about the design and construction phase before the project can move 
forward. 

(2) A plaza in the vicinity of Piers 15,17, 27 and 29, known as Wharf 25. A number 
of different possibilities have been identified for the creation of a major public plaza 
which the Port would develop and a removal of a pier to improve views. However, 
there is no clear recommendation at this point. Staff has identified that larger area as 
a special planning area which needs to be worked on further with BCDC, City 
Planning and the community to work out the maritime use priorities for that area and 
historic preservation issues as well. There are a number of bulkhead buildings and 
pier shed structures which have been identified as potential landmarks for the National 
Register. The Port has to complete the planning process before it can pursue, any 
development project. She also noted that the Waterfront Plan itself identifies those 
"transitional maritime" facilities. It is recognized that they are either cargo or cargo 
support related and both the advisory board and Port Commission have been very 
clear to ensure that those maritime needs are met first. Before the Port would be able 
to redevelop those facilities, there are a set of criteria and findings that would have to 
be made before it can be redeveloped for something other than an exclusively cargo 
related facility. There are some protections built into the Waterfront Land Use Plan. 

(3) A plaza on the South Beach area, called as the Brannan Street Wharf, which would 
involve the removal of Pier 34 and 36 and the construction of a plaza over the water 
to serve the South Beach community. However, the design details have not been 
worked out. Port staff will work out the details with the South Beach/Rincon Hill 
community. The funding for the Brannan Street Wharf and the Wharf 25 would be 
financed through a public access funds set up by the Port into which 25 % of proceeds 
received by the Port for new development projects would be deposited. 

In addition, under the concept agreement, the Port would commit to, in addition to 
removing Piers 34 and 36 for the creation of the Brannan Street Wharf, would be the 
removal of Pier 24, which is a condemned facility . The last pier identified for 
removal is Pier 33. There are outstanding historic preservation issues that need to be 
resolved. One of the other provisions addressed in the concept agreement calls for the 
Port to conduct further preservation planning to define specifically which resources 
should be retained, what standards should be maintained and how the public access 
and public objectives for views can be met as well as balancing the historic 
preservation objectives. A provision exists for Pier 33 to allow for the 
reconfiguration of the facilities that parallel the seawall on the marginal wharf to 
improve the facility for cruise operations. 



M022597.igq -3- 



The concept agreement also sets forth public access requirements for new 
development on the piers. In addition to the plazas, 25% of public access would be 
provided on new developments, new piers. The agreement also sets forth provisions 
for defining the envelope within which piers can be reconfigured that would meet 
BCDC's approval. In relation to the pier condition issue which Ms. Johnck referred 
to, staff sees it as a very important accomplishment of this concept agreement. It 
identifies which piers are in good condition that should be allowed to be maintained 
and seismically upgraded for the continued use for the remaining life of those 
facilities. 

Regarding the joint design review process, the intent is not to bend rules or get around 
any requirements. The intent is to bring forth all of the agencies that have a very 
clear role in defining what should happen along the waterfront and to have the 
agencies hear each other's concerns and resolved them in a very efficient manner. 
She noted that after the March 6 hearing, staff will be looking for directions from its 
Commissions to engage in a more detailed work in order to generate proposed 
amendments to BCDC documents and to the Waterfront Plan. All of the details will 
be incorporated into the Urban Design Guidelines and to the Waterfront Land Use 
Plan in order to have a package that encompasses what the Port intends to do in the 
waterfront before the Commission adopts the Plan in April or May. The BCDC 
amendments will be before their Commission in July or August. Prior to those 
decisions being made, staff is putting together these commitments in a bilateral 
agreement between the two agencies so that the Port Commission would have a clear 
understanding and commitment that certain policy changes will be made by BCDC in 
exchange for the Port Commission adopting the final Waterfront Plan. 

She pointed out that in addition to the Joint Public Hearing, there is a waterfront bus 
tour for BCDC and Port Commissioners at 10:30 a.m. 

Commissioner Herman inquired if there is further hearing at the next Commission 
Meeting. Ms. Oshima replied that the joint hearing will be at BCDC's regularly 
scheduled meeting on March 6 at 1 p.m. On that calendar, it will be a Special 
Commission Meeting for the Port Commission as there will be a joint BCDC/Port 
Commission briefing and public hearing. 

Commissioner Herman inquired if all the things embraced by the remarks given are 
part of the BCDC program. Mr. Travis replied to the affirmative. Commissioner 
Herman made an observation that the concept agreement is far too ambitious. 
Priorities have to be set before anything can be done and he has not heard the 
priorities as yet. BCDC has originally been a traditional champion in the preservation 
of maritime and now the reinstatement of maritime. He is concerned because we are 
in the process of struggling at the Port to do what too many people said we couldn't 
do i.e. recreate a maritime arrangement that takes precedence over almost everything. 
To include all the items mentioned, there will be no room for maritime, for 
reinstatement of some kind of primary niche maritime or passenger terminals that are 
in practical locations. Commissioner Herman inquired if a document is available for 
review prior to the meeting and requested BCDC's point of view. 



M022597.igq 



Commissioner Hardeman commented that Commissioner Herman has three votes for 
maritime on any inch of this waterfront. BCDC and Port staff also agree with 
Commissioner Herman. The Commissioners have no intention to change that as the 
Mayor expressed that maritime takes precedence. He noted that the Executive 
Director, together with the Mayor, is planning a trip to Asia to bring some of the 
cargo ships to call in San Francisco. 

Mr. Will Travis stated that he understands and shares Commissioner Herman's points 
and concerns. He, however, believes that the agreement sets out a structure where, 
working together, both Commissions can craft a plan for the San Francisco waterfront 
which provides opportunities for maritime, non-maritime development, reduces the 
coverage of San Francisco Bay by piers and opens up public access to the waterfront 
so that the northern waterfront is connected to the fabric of San Francisco. It may be 
ambitious but it is achievable. A joint hearing is scheduled next week to give the Port 
Commission an opportunity to communicate with the BCDC Commissioners. 
Documentation will be provided to the Commission which contains the agreement, 
their analysis and how they intend to proceed. 

Ms. Oshima clarified that the public access and improvements discussed in the 
concept agreement primarily focus on the area of the waterfront north of China Basin 
channel because south of the channel, both in the Port Waterfront Land Use Plan and 
BCDC's Land Use Plan documents, the vast majority of that land is reserved for 
cargo, ship repair, for Port priority uses. To the degree that there are non-maritime 
and public access opportunities that are identified for Port properties north of China 
Basin channel, the Port's Waterfront Land Use Plan promotes that those activities 
only will be developed in concert with a maritime use. 

Commissioner Herman stated that the thought of Piers 19, 23, 29 and 31 as potential 
places for parks is shocking and upsetting to him. He'd like someone to define what 
advantages will be exploited by more public access. He thinks that a careful review 
should be considered to envision what the ultimate result would be of such a broad, 
elaborate and incredibly costly proposition. 

Ms. Oshima stated that they look forward to further comments by the Commission. 
They have identified broader issues but realized that the details need to come forth. 

Commissioner Herman then requested to be excused for a medical appointment. He 
left the meeting at 5:15 p.m. 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired if the documentation which shows how the piers 
have been classified will be available to the Commission and to the public. Diane 
Oshima replied that maps will be provided in the meeting. 

Commissioner Hardeman commented that it is amazing that all these groups of diverse 
interest were able to put together a plan seeming to meet the needs of everybody. He 
noted that Diane Oshima has put tremendous amount of hours and time explaining the 
thoughts and ideas to each of the commissioners. He thanked her for a job well 



M022597.igq 



-5- 



done. 

4. LEGISLATIVE 

A. Resolution authorizing the Executive Director to seek programmatic changes to 
Proposition 116 Grants (Fiscal Years 91/92 and 92/93) from the California 
Transportation Commission (CTO for the Downtown Ferry Terminal and to seek the 
final allocation of funds for construction. (Resolution No. 97-16) 

Ms. Veronica Sanchez, Manager of Governmental Affairs, indicated that the item 
before the Commission is a resolution reprogramming funds that were received from 
CTC a few years ago for the Downtown Ferry Terminal project. 

When Port staff originally applied to CTC for this project, the idea was to modernize 
and upgrade the north basin area, providing improvements for passenger walkways, 
covered walkways, ADA accessibility and seismic upgrades. In the process, through 
the Port's design and engineering effort and meetings with ferry operators, if the Port 
is going to build a project for the future of this region that would accommodate the 
anticipated growth and ferry service in the bay, concentrating all of the Port's ferry 
operations north of the Ferry Building is not going to work. Therefore, the design 
team and the ferry operators recommended a two basin configuration to provide ample 
space south of the Ferry Building to allow for the future growth of ferry routes 
. coming in from Alameda and Oakland, anticipated ferry routes to Treasure Island, 
Hunter's Point and other points. With the reconfiguration, it created a change in the 
scope of the project submitted to CTC. One of the biggest additions that occurred in 
this two basin configuration is the breakwater. The breakwater neds to be built 
because the storm conditions in the south basin is intense that it would create a hazard 
for passenger safety as well as the vessels. When the design team came back with the 
recommendation to build the breakwater, the price tag was $6 million. However, Port 
staff set a way to fund this project out of federal funds. In the process, staff was 
successful in bringing in additional federal funds. With the change in scope of work 
and the addition of new federal funds, Port staff has to present to CTC the revised 
project. At the end of April, staff intends to seek CTC's approval of the programmatic 
changes and show them that the original intent of the grant and their concern for the 
seismic safety of the facilities and terminal amenities for the passengers are still being 
met. A core portion of this project is the breakthrough connecting Market Street 
through the Ferry Building to the terminals which will enhance the transportation 
functions of this building and will be a dramatic addition to the whole complex. Staff 
is in the final stages of approvals with the federal agencies, pending approval of the 
Environmental Review Documents, being reviewed by Caltrans. If CTC approves the 
Port's requests for a programmatic change and allocation of Proposition 116 funds, 
staff will seek Commission's approval of the bid advertisement at the May 13, 1997 
meeting. If the contract is awarded by the Commission at its August 26 meeting, 
construction could commence by September 1, 1997 and be completed by December 
1998. The CTC application requires the Port Commission's resolution to include 
specific statements which are included in the attached resolution. 



M022597.igq 



Commissioner McCarthy inquired if the north basin would be moved over and if it 
would handle the ferry service to Sausalito and to the north bay and accommodate 
future ferry needs. Ms. Sanchez replied to the affirmative. Staff will also build one 
barge but the basin is designed in such a way that if it needs to add a second barge in 
the future, it has that flexibility. This is a $13.5 million construction project and the 
Port contributed a minimal amount. 

Commissioner Cook inquired if the breakwater to the south is a public access. Ms. 
Sanchez replied that originally the breakwater was designed for public access but it 
will now be an added bid item. The public access costs $2 to $3 million extra. The 
design of the breakwater is such that if there's an opportunity in the future 
development of this area and should additional funds become available, the public 
access can be done easily. 

Commissioner Cook inquired about the future of the Golden Gate Ferry Terminal. 
Mr. Osmundson replied that the Golden Gate Bridge Highway Transportation District 
has 45 years left on the lease. The district has also expressed an interest in retaining 
that structure. There are currently no plans to modify the building. Commissioner 
Cook stated that it is unfortunate because the building blocks views and it is 
cumbersome. Queuing passengers in loading ferries right at the edge of the platform 
does not allow the public to have a continuous walkway next to the shoreline. The 
BCDC permit for the construction of that terminal required the installation of the 
second deck for public access. The Golden Gate Transit has a singular design. The 
Port has a different configuration wherein the barge on the north and south floats to 
allow public access along the shoreline. 

Commissioner Lee inquired and staff confirmed that the remaining work would be the 
trestle. The breakwater will be built 300 feet out. The amenities such as lighting, 
benches will cost $3.4 million to complete the work. Joe Roger, Engineering 
Department, stated that the public access adds another $1.5 million to the project. 
Commissioner Lee urged staff to find the missing money to complete the public access 
work. 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired if the Golden Gate Transit can be relocated. Mr. 
Osmundson replied that the first priority with the project is to expand the berthing 
capacity. Staff will approach the district about potentially redesigning the facility. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy 

seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the 
resolution was adopted. 

5. REAL ESTATE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT 

A. Approval of percentage rental adjustments for Scoma's Restaurant located on Pier 47 
at Fisherman's Wharf. (Resolution No. 97-13) 

Mr. Kirk Bennett, Senior Property Manager for the Northern Waterfront and 



M022597.igq 



Fisherman's Wharf, indicated that Scoma's Restaurant, Incorporated operates Scoma's 
Restaurant on Pier 47, whose lease term extends until April 30, 2036. This lease 
provides for payment of percentage rental, which is subject to periodic review and 
adjustment. The rates of percentage rental for like uses in San Francisco in the 
vicinity have increased or decreased as of the adjustment date, the Port is to adjust the 
rate of percentage rental for the lease accordingly. 

In 1995, the Port retained a market consultant to perform a market survey and 
analysis of percentage rents in the Fisherman's Wharf vicinity. Based upon the 
independent study and analysis obtained from the Port's consultant, the input provided 
by Port tenants and their consultants, and Port staff's own consideration and review of 
the data, Port staff concluded that the percentage rental for restaurants providing full 
table service which is located over the water should be adjusted to the following 
percentage rental rates: food 6.5%; alcoholic beverages & all other items sold through 
the bar 6.5% and all other uses 8.5%. 

In response to Commissioner Cook's inquiry about how much additional rent the Port 
will receive, Mr. Bennett replied that based on last year's figure, the Port will receive 
approximately $77,000 additional rent per year. 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired about the other uses at Scoma's. Mr. Bennett 
replied that the lease has three categories: food, alcoholic beverages and all other 
items sold through the bar and a "catch-all" all other uses. Scoma's sell souvenirs and 
coffee cups which is categorized under all other uses. Commissioner McCarthy was 
concerned that the percentage rental rate for the alcoholic beverage is lower than the 
all other uses especially when Scoma's does not really have other uses. Mr. Bennett 
replied that the percentage rent clause is confusing. In the use clause, it does not 
allow anything except for a restaurant. To the extent that Scoma's sell any incidentals 
like coffee mugs, it does not have any right in their lease to set up a retail store. 
During the 1970' s when the percentage rents were established, there were two 
different levels of percentages. At Scoma's there is a lower percentage rent for food 
than alcoholic beverages. As time passed, the percentage rent for food and alcoholic 
beverage has gone up. 

Commissioner McCarthy pointed out that in some cases it makes sense to raise the 
percentage rents for all other uses. In this particular case, however, it does not since 
Scoma's does not have those kinds of uses. Commissioner McCarthy inquired if there 
is flexibility in all the leases. Mr. Bennett replied that the leases provide for the same 
three categories, with the exception of two other leases. For consistency, the 
percentage rents are set the same. 

Commissioner Hardeman commented that he would like to vote no on this item 
because it is unfair to punish one of the Port's best tenants. Seeing the income that 
the Port derives from their business operation, it seems unfair to give them a raise in 
their rent. 

ACTION: Commissioner Lee moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy seconded 

M022597.igq "8- 



the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

B. Consent to non-charter excursions from Pier 39 marina by vessels not owned by Pier 
39. (Resolution No. 97-14^ 

Mr. Kirk Bennett indicated that the Pier 39 master lease, amended on October 31, 
1979, authorizes certain specified uses on its premises. The lease provides that any 
new use or change of use not authorized in the lease requires consent by the Port and 
it further provides that the Port and the Pier 39 Limited Partnership negotiate the new 
rent due the Port for the new use or change of use. The master lease authorizes a 
broadly defined use of the premises by tour boats operated by Pier 39. It does not 
authorize tour boats not operated by Pier 39 to operate from the Pier 39 marina, 
except for party and charter boat operations. Pier 39 recently requested that the Port 
consent to tour boats not operated by Pier 39 to operate tours from the Pier 39 
marina. Pier 39 and Port staff has discussed this request and reached an agreement, 
upon the following recommendation to the Port Commission: (1) new or change use is 
to be tour boat operations not operated by Pier 39 involving tourists of San Francisco 
Bay for which tickets are purchased from tour boat operators by passengers on an 
individual basis; (2) the consent to such use is limited to operators of sailboats 
properly authorized by the US Coast Guard and operators of power boats properly 
authorized by the US Coast Guard to carry not more than 48 passengers; and (3) the 
rent to be paid the Port for this tour boat operation not operated by Pier 39 will be 
calculated at 7 % of all gross receipts generated by the owner and operator of such 
operation. The 7% of gross receipts is the same percent which would be paid if this 
was operated by Pier 39. It is also the same percentage rent paid by other Port tenants 
for such uses including Red & White, Hornblower and the Ruby. It is the same as 
those operated at Pier Vi, consistent with the Port standard. 

Commissioner Cook asked for a clarification on the distinction of "passengers on 
individual basis." Mr. Bennett replied that a separate section in the lease talks about 
tour boats run by Pier 39. Among the authorized uses for the premises demised by 
the lease are: (1) "Marina (including berthing and slip rental for pleasure craft and 
yachts, party and charter boats, including fishing boats - specifically, excluding, 
however any tour boat or ferry boat.)" and (2) "Tenant operated tour boats," which 
are defined as "any passenger boat, ferry boat, excursion boat or other transportation 
or excursions for hire service accepting passengers or discharging passengers at Pier 
39." The lease does not authorize tour boats not operated by tenant to operate from 
the Pier 39 Marina located on the premises, except for party and charter boat 
operations. 

The tenant has been approached by the owners of the Adventure Cat, which is a 
catamaran sailboat operating from South Beach Harbor primarily on a charter basis, to 
relocate to the Pier 39 Marina, where it would offer charters, as well as tours, which 
would involve trips for which tickets are purchased by passengers on an individual 
basis. 



M022597.igq 



-9- 



Commissioner Cook inquired about the amount of revenue to the Port. Mr. Bennett 
replied that it is within $10,000 to $20,000 a year. 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired whose responsible for ensuring that an operation is 
going to be covered under this and if the rent is paid directly from the operator to the 
Port. She wondered who keeps track of the bookkeeping on the charter tours. Mr. 
Bennett replied that it's Pier 39' s responsibility. They do a quarterly report to the 
Port that shows how much revenue is generated by the tour operators. Pier 39 is 
responsible for monitoring the operation. Port staff ensures that there is compliance 
with the lease. 

Commissioner Lee inquired if there is an audit provision. Ms. Van Nostern replied to 
the affirmative and added that Pier 39 has an obligation under the lease to disclose all 
of their income. The Port has not had any problems in dealing with Pier 39. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

A. Approval of Fourth Amendment to authorize additional design and construction 

review work for Professional Services Contract No. SA 3930045. "Downtown Ferry 
Terminal Project" with ROMA Design Group. (Resolution No. 97-18) 

Mr. Alex Lee, Director of Facilities and Operations, introduced himself to the 
Commission and added that he is excited to return back to the Port of San Francisco 
and looks forward to the challenge. Commissioner Hardeman, on behalf of the 
Commission, welcomed Mr. Lee and stated that he has heard wonderful things about 
him from the Port and Muni employees. 

Mr. Cliff Jarrard, Chief Harbor Engineer, indicated that in March 1994, the Port 
contracted with Roma Design Group to assist Port staff with the design of the 
Downtown Ferry Terminal Project. As the project progressed, Port staff successfully 
secured additional funding and expanded the scope of the project accordingly. On 
November 21, 1994, the Commission approved Contract Amendment No. 2 for 
additional design work, including a new breakwater and the relocation of the boiler 
room/utility area, which is currently positioned on the east deck adjacent to the Ferry 
Building. On August 29, 1995, the Commission approved Contract Amendment No. 
3 to perform additional environmental studies related to the proposed breakwater. 
Amendment No. 1 involved a no-cost, incidental change to the contract which did not 
require Commission approval. 

To date, Port staff with the assistance of the Consultant has prepared approximately 
90% of the contract documents for the Downtown Ferry Terminal Project. Several 
issues have recently surfaced requiring revisions and/or additions to the construction 
contract documents and increases to the scope of construction stage services. 



M022597.igq 



-10- 



The estimated construction cost of the complete Downtown Ferry Terminal Project is 
approximately $17 million. The Port currently has secured nearly $14 million from 
State and Federal funding agencies and applications for additional governmental 
funding are pending. The project will be bid using additive bid items to ensure that 
the final project is fully funded. 

Commissioner Lee thanked Cliff Jarrard and Joe Roger for a very extensive briefing. 
He is always concerned about big amendments to the original contract. However, 
Mr. Jarrard and Mr. Roger gave him a very good explanation of why it needs to be 
done. He asked who's responsible for the project in terms of the engineering and 
stamping of drawings. Mr. Jarrard replied that ROMA's subconsultants would stamp 
certain drawings and Port staff would stamp certain drawings. There will be a 
division of work between the consultant and Port staff. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

B. Authorization to award Contract 2622. "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit Project" 
(Resolution No. 97-19) THIS ITEM HAS BEEN PUT OVER TO THE NEXT 
MEETING 

8. MARITIME 

9. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 

10. MARKETING 

11. CONSENT CALENDAR 

The Commission Secretary announced that Item 1 1C will be continued to the next 
meeting. 

A. Authorization for the Executive Director to participate in the Mayor's Goodwill and 
Friendship Mission to China on March 31-April 12. 1997 (Resolution No. 97-15) 

B. Approval of travel authorization for one Port representative to travel to Oxnard. CA 
to attend the West Coast Conference on Contaminated Soils and Groundwater on 
March 10-14. 1997. (Resolution No. 97-17) 

C. A pproval of lease with S&C Ford of San Francisco for 66.000 sq. ft. of shed space at 
Pier 50. Shed "C" (Mission Rock Street at Terry Francois Blvd.) (Resolution No. 
97-20) THIS ITEM HAS BEEN PUT OVER TO THE NEXT MEETING. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval of Items 1 1 A and 1 IB; 
Commissioner McCarthy seconded the motion. All of the 
Commissioners were in favor; the items on the consent calendar were 



M022597.igq 



■11- 



adopted. 

12. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

13. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

At 6:08 p.m., the Commission Secretary announced that the Commission will withdraw to 
executive session to discuss the following: 

A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

B . CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Pier 80 

Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*NorCal Representative : Mike Sangiacomo, President and Don Moriel, Executive 
Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and NorCal, regarding the property located at Pier 80. 
This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING 
LITIGATION MATTER: 

1) Neudecker v. Bouey . Superior Court No. 964-862 and Neudecker v. CCSF . 974- 
043; pursuant to subdivision (a) of California Government Code Section 54956.9 

D. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 
Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 



M022597.igq 



-12- 



At 7:35 p.m., Commissioners Hardeman, McCarthy, Lee and Cook and returned from 
executive session and convened in public session. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval to not disclose any information 

discussed in the executive session; Commissioner Cook seconded the motion. 
All of the Commissioners were in favor. 

The meeting was adjourned at 7:37 p.m. 



M022597.igq -13- 



/SAN FRANCISCO 



h 



■+.».\ 



PORT COMMISSION 



. SPECIAL MEETING ^VIARCH 6, 1997 ^ DEPT 

'' ***Please note the time and place of the meeting *** DOCUMEN ~ 

FEB 2 8 1997 

SAN FRANCISCO 
10:00 a.m. to Noon 4-4-4-4-4- PUBLIC LIBRARY 

Bus Tour of San Francisco Waterfront 
Starting from the Ferry Building 
The Embarcadero. San Francisco 



1. NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC COMMENT 

Public comment is permitted on any matter within Port jurisdiction, and is not 
limited to agenda items. Public comment on non-agenda items may be raised 
during New Business/Public Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it 
to the Commission Secretary. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. 



2. BUS TOUR OF SAN FRANCISCO WATERFRONT 

Prior to the March 6, 1997 BCDC Commission meeting, the Port of San Francisco 
will take BCDC and Port Commissioners, Alternates and members of the public on 
a bus tour of the San Francisco waterfront. The tour will begin at 10:00 a.m. from 
the Ferry Building and proceed to Pier 35 to pick up BCDC Commissioners at 
10:30 a.m. The bus will return to the Ferry Building at noon. The Port has also 
invited BCDC and Port Commissioners, Alternates and their staff to a buffet 
luncheon to be served in the Cruise Ship Terminal on Pier 35 from noon to 1:00 
p.m. Any members of the public who wish to go on the tour must contact the Port 
by 5:00 p.m., Monday, March 3, 1997. To make tour reservations or obtain 
information regarding this Special Meeting, call the Waterfront Plan Information 
Line at (415) 274-0354. 



A030697.igq 



-1- 



DISABILITY ACCESS 



The Port Commission office is located on the third floor of the Ferry Building, Suite 3100. 
The Port office is wheelchair accessible. Accessible seating for persons with disabilities 
(including those using wheelchairs) will be available. The closest accessible BART station is 
Embarcadero Station located at Market and Steuart Streets. The closest accessible MUNI 
Metro station is Embarcadero station located at Market and Spear Streets. Accessible MUNI 
lines serving the Ferry Building are the 9, 31, 32 and 71. For more information about MUNI 
accessible services, call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking at the Ferry Building and at the public lot in the Embarcadero 
median in front of the Ferry Building. Assistive listening devices are available for use in the 
Port Commission Meeting. 

The following services are available on request 72 hours prior to the meeting. Please contact 
Kevin Jensen at (415) 274-0555. Late requests will be honored if possible. 

• American Sign Language Interpreters • The use of a reader during the meeting 

• A Sound Enhancement System • Minutes of the Meeting in Alternative 

• Large Print of the Agenda Formats 

In order to assist the City's efforts to accommodate persons with severe allergies, 
environmental illnesses, multiple chemical sensitivity or related disabilities, attendees at public 
meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various chemical-based 
products. Please help the City accommodate these individuals. 

Know Your Rights Unde r the Sunshin e Ordinance 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. 
Commissions, boards, councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the 
people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people 
and that City operations are open to the people's review. For more information on your rights 
under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco Administrative Code) or to 
report a violation of the ordinance, contact the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force at 554-4851. 



A030697 igq 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING 
MARCH 6, 1997 



1. ROLL CALL: 

The meeting was called to order by Commission President Michael Hardeman 
at 10:08 a.m. The following Commissioners were present: Michael 
Hardeman and Frankie Lee. Commissioners McCarthy, Cook and Herman 
were not present. 

2. NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC COMMENT 

There being no public speakers, Port staff took the BCDC and Port 
Commissioners, agency staff and interested public on a waterfront bus tour of 
the area between Fisherman's Wharf and Pier 70. 

The tour discussion provided an overview of Waterfront Plan policies, 
applicable urban design guidelines, and the Draft Concept Agreement 
provisions. 

The tour included sights of each of the public plaza sites and piers proposed 
for removal in the Concept Agreement. 

Many Commissioners expressed appreciation for the tour, for providing a 
more concrete understanding of the Waterfront Plan and the proposed public 
access improvements. For many, this was their first experience at the San 
Francisco waterfront. 

3. ADJOURNMENT 

Commissioner Lee returned from the tour of the waterfront and adjourned the 
special meeting at 11:45 a.m. Commissioner Hardeman was excused to 
attend a meeting with the Mayor. DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

OCT 8 1999 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 

M030697.igq -1- 



^SAN FRANCISCO 
,PORT COMMISSION 

SPECIAL MEETING (MARCH 6, 1997^ 

***Please note the time and place of the meeting #"#--fc 



1:00 p.m. - Special Meeting 4-4-«-«-4- 

Port of San Francisco Cruise Ship Terminal «-«-«-4-«- 



/&/<? 7 Pier 35. The Embarcadero. San Francisco 



°OCUMBNTS DEPT. 

MAR 3 1qo 7 *~> c **, 



«-«-4-«-4- 



AGENDA 



1. ROLL CALL 



2. SPECIAL ITEM - to coincide with Item No. 8 of BCDC's agenda. 

Joint Public Hearing with the San Francisco Port Commission and BCDC on a 
Concept Agreement regarding the Planning for the San Francisco Waterfront. 

Staff will brief the Port and BCDC Commission on the status of the planning for 
the San Francisco Waterfront Concept Agreement. The purpose of this joint 
hearing is to receive comments from the public and obtain direction from the 
Commission to guide staff in further planning for the San Francisco waterfront. 

3. NEW BUSINESS/PUBLIC COMMENT 

Public comment is permitted on any matter within Port jurisdiction, and is not 
limited to agenda items. Public comment on non-agenda items may be raised 
during New Business/Public Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it 
to the Commission Secretary. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. 

4. ADJOURNMENT 



A030697.igq 



-1- 



DISABILITY ACCESS 



The Cruise Terminal is located on the second floor of Pier 35, near the intersection of Bay 
Street and The Embarcadero. Pier 35 is wheelchair accessible. Accessible seating for persons 
with disabilities (including those using wheelchairs) will be available. The closest accessible 
BART station is Embarcadero Station located at Market and Steuart Streets. The closest 
accessible MUNI Metro station is Embarcadero station located at Market and Spear Streets. 
Accessible MUNI service to Pier 35 is provided on the 32 line. For more information about 
MUNI accessible services, call 923-6142. 

There is accessible parking at Pier 35. Assistive listening devices are available for use in the 
Port Commission Meeting. 

The following services are available on request 72 hours prior to the meeting. Please contact 
Kevin Jensen at (415) 274-0555. Late requests will be honored if possible. 

• American Sign Language Interpreters • The use of a reader during the meeting 

• A Sound Enhancement System • Minutes of the Meeting in Alternative 

• Large Print of the Agenda Formats 

In order to assist the City's efforts to accommodate persons with severe allergies, 
environmental illnesses, multiple chemical sensitivity or related disabilities, attendees at public 
meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various chemical-based 
products. Please help the City accommodate these individuals. 

Know Your Rights Under the Sunshine Ordinance 

Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. 
Commissions, boards, councils and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the 
people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people 
and that City operations are open to the people's review. For more information on your rights 
under the Sunshine Ordinance (Chapter 67 of the San Francisco Administrative Code) or to 
report a violation of the ordinance, contact the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force at 554-4851. 



A030697.igq 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING 
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING WITH BCDC & PORT COMMISSION 

MARCH 6, 1997 

1. Call to Order 

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Robert Tufts at 1:14 p.m., at the Port 
of San Francisco Cruise Ship Terminal, Pier 35, the Embarcadero, San Francisco. 

Chairman Tufts indicated that because today's meeting would begin with a joint 
session of BCDC and the San Francisco Port Commission, there would be a slight 
change in the order of BCDC's agenda. After the roll call, which is Item 2 on the 
agenda, Item 8 will be taken up, the two Commissions' joint hearing on the 
Waterfront Planning Agreement. At the conclusion of the presentation, Item 3, the 
Public Comment Period, would be taken up and it would be a joint Public Comment 
Period between the Port and BCDC for any items not on the agenda. 

Chairman Tufts, on behalf of the Commission, expressed thanks to the Port of San 
Francisco for arranging this morning's bus tour of the waterfront, for hosting the 
lunch before the meeting, for providing BCDC with this meeting space and for 
agreeing to meet jointly with the Commission. The Chair said the joint meeting was 
providing both agencies with an excellent opportunity to communicate directly with 
each other. He asked staff to schedule this type of arrangement again so that the Port 
and BCDC can work together to craft a workable San Francisco Waterfront Special 
Area Plan that will meet both of their needs. 

Chairman Tufts thanked Diane Oshima and Dan Hoddap for conducting the bus trip 
and for providing the briefing. 

2. Roll Call 

Present were: Chairman Roger Tufts, Vice Chairman Angelo Siracusa, 
Commissioners Barna, Barrales, Bierman, Bruzzone, Cale (represented by Alternate 
Smith), Casey, Chan (represented by Alternate Kelly), Corbin, Cutler, Fong, 
Goldzband, Hight (represented by Alternate Valentine), Hughan, Johns, Kondylis, 
McHugh (represented by Alternate Carruthers), Morrison, Ortiz-Cashman, Rippey, 
Rose, Schwinn, and Uilkema. 

Not present were: Department of Finance (Klass), ABAG's appointee (Vacant) and 
Governor's appointee (Vacant). 

-1- 



The Port Commission Secretary called the roll call for the Port. Commissioners 
Frankie E. Lee and Preston Cook were present. Commissioners McCarthy was not 
present. Commissioner Herman arrived at 1:17 p.m. She also noted that Commission 
President Michael Hardeman and Port Executive Director Douglas Wong had been 
called into a meeting at the Mayor's office. 

Joint Public Hearing with the Bay Conservation and Development Commission on 
a Concept Agreement among the Staffs of the BCDC. Save San Francisco Bay 
Association and the Port regarding the Planning for the San Francisco 
Waterfront, (heard out of order) 

Jennifer Ruffolo, BCDC's Assistant Executive Director for Government Affairs, 
noted that Diane Oshima from the Port's planning staff and Marc Holmes from Save 
San Francisco Bay Association were with her to present the agreement. She said they 
would be describing various aspects of the concept agreement, highlighting the 
benefits that would help the respective organizations to better achieve their goals. 

Ms. Ruffolo explained that she would focus her remarks on BCDC's current law and 
policies regarding fill and replacement fill on the San Francisco Waterfront, in order 
to set the context for the public access and fill policy changes that would result from 
the concept agreement. 

Ms. Ruffolo indicated that the most significant elements of this agreement from 
BCDC staff's perspective pertained to the provision of public access and fill removal 
to create open water, as well as revised rules concerning pier repair and replacement. 
She said staff believes, through the policy changes that would arise from 
implementation of this Plan, BCDC would obtain more and better public access than 
under the current regulatory regime, would return more of the Bay to open water 
sooner than would occur under the current regime, and would spend less staff time 
arguing with Port staff over their interpretation of BCDC policies. 

The McAteer-Petris Act authorizes fill in the Bay for water-oriented uses, including 
public assembly. It also requires the provision of maximum feasible public access for 
those projects within the Commission's shoreline band jurisdiction. The Act does not 
expressly address the treatment of piers that predate the establishment of BCDC. 

The Bay Plan requires the provision of public access with every project in and along 
the shoreline of the Bay, including committed fills. 

Ms. Ruffolo advised that, prior to 1971, the Bay Plan allowed fill for commercial 
recreation and public assembly only on privately-owned land. Because public lands 
could not be used for these revenue-generating purposes, the owners of public lands 
had limited economic incentive to remove deteriorated piers. 



-2 



To provide such an incentive, in 1971, the Commission amended the Bay Plan to 
allow fill for commercial recreation and public assembly purposes on either privately- 
owned or publicly-owned land. Fill is allowed for these purposes only if certain 
conditions are met, including that the fill be placed only in connection with the 
removal of deteriorated or obsolete piers, that the fill cover an area of the Bay smaller 
in size than is being uncovered by the removal of piers; and that those parts of the 
replacement fill devoted to uses other than public recreation, open space, and public 
access will cover no more than 50% of the area being uncovered. Only pile-supported 
fill may be placed. This is known as the "Fifty Percent Rule." 

Ms. Ruffolo observed the Port and BCDC have a long history of disagreement over 
how the provisions of the Bay Plan and the McAteer-Petris Act regarding replacement 
fill, fill for commercial recreation, and public access should be applied to the lands 
under the Port's jurisdiction. A series of opinions from the Attorney General's Office 
have been written to clarify BCDC's authority. An informal opinion issued in 1986 
and known as the "Eagan Rule" concluded that proposed development that involved 
complete removal and replacement of either a pier's decking or its supporting pilings 
falls within BCDC's Bay jurisdiction and constitutes further filling of the Bay. Thus 
the uses supported by the new fill must be water oriented. 

It also concluded that some projects on piers, particularly "de-minimus repairs," can 
be treated as falling within shoreline band jurisdiction and therefore not subject to the 
water-oriented-use limitation. Proposed uses falling somewhere between these two 
extremes may or may not be subject to the water-oriented-use limitation, and the 
Commission's level of permit review must be decided on a case-by-case basis. In 
1992, another opinion reaffirmed that opinion and its guidance on when the 
Commission must assert its Bay jurisdiction. 

Ms. Ruffolo stated that the last staff analysis of the extent of pier removal and 
replacement fill, which was prepared in late 1989, indicated that, since 1965, the 
Commission had authorized the removal of more than 39 acres of pile-supported fill 
from the San Francisco Waterfront. Slightly more than 14 acres of replacement fill 
had been authorized; thus, the replacement fill rules appeared to be working to 
achieve the overall goals of increasing public access to San Francisco Bay and 
increasing the extent of open water through removal of fill not needed for water- 
oriented uses. 

However, interpretation and application of the fifty percent rule and the Eagan 
opinion have been troublesome for the Port. The Port's draft Waterfront Land Use 
Plan identifies certain problems with BCDC's authority, which it believes constrains 
its ability to carry out its mission. Some of the issues include: 

(1) The need to repair existing piers supporting non-water-oriented uses, to allow 
those uses and possibly new ones to operate for an interim period to continue to 



generate revenues for the Port. 

(2) The need to substantially repair piers that support existing commercial recreation 
uses without having to provide additional public access and to remove piers as 
now required by the replacement pier policy. 

(3) The desire to rehabilitate bulkhead buildings for non-water-oriented uses. 

(4) The desire to integrate some non- water-oriented uses as part of a rehabilitated or 
new pier project used primarily for water-oriented uses. 

These concerns led to the MOU between the BCDC and the Port, signed in February 
1996, in which both organizations agreed to work through these issues and to amend 
both Commissions' policy documents to reflect consistent treatment of the waterfront 
within the constraints of the McAteer Act. After more than a year of staff discussions 
and negotiations over potential policy changes on these issues, the Concept Agreement 
was signed by the Port, BCDC, and Save the Bay Association. 

Ms. Ruffolo explained that the benefits arising from the implementation of the 
Concept Agreement would be, first, that the Port's commitment to build three new 
public access plazas and to remove certain piers, in concert with the new BCDC rules 
for categorical definition of piers in shoreline band jurisdiction, would allow the Port 
and BCDC to move away from a case-by-case analysis of whether proposed projects 
were in Bay or shoreline band jurisdictions, whether they would provide maximum 
feasible public access, and whether they would comply with the provisions of the fifty 
percent rule. 

Second, public access and urban design guidelines would clarify for project 
developers the expectations for the extent and quality of public access to be provided 
as part of new projects on existing piers or replacement piers. 

Third, the major public access plazas and new open water would satisfy most of the 
public access requirements for interim uses on existing piers, alleviating the need to 
extract piecemeal public access provisions from each Port permit. Some interim 
projects that generated greater demand for public access on the waterfront would be 
required to provide additional access or to contribute in some way towards the major 
new plazas and open water. 

Fourth, the joint design review body, which would represent BCDC, the Port and the 
City, would help develop early consensus on design and public access issues. 

Ms. Ruffolo said staff believes that the changes outlined in the Concept Agreement 
would provide a better way to achieve BCDC's goals and would improve the permit 
review process. She believed it was important to emphasize that all policy changes 



that would follow from the Concept Agreement would be consistent with the McAteer 
Act and with the Attorney General's opinion. 

Commissioner James Herman arrived at 1:17 p.m. The Port Commission Secretary 
announced that the Port Commission now has a quorum. 

Commission President Michael Hardeman and Port Executive Director Douglas F. 
Wong arrived at 1:30 p.m. The Port Commission Secretary acknowledged their 
presence. 

Diane Oshima with the Port's planning staff, advised that a lot of work had gone into 
this effort. She complimented and recognized Jennifer Ruffolo, Jeff Blanchfield, Will 
Travis and Marc Holmes in particular for having the stamina to engage in these 
negotiations, which she thought had resulted in a very significant milestone in the 
Concept Agreement. 

She believed the concept was very significant as something intended to be 
incorporated into the Port's and BCDC's planning documents. Additionally, the 
agreement items would be looked at with respect to the City's General Plan policies. 

One of the significant aspects, in terms of public access improvements, would involve 
the creation of three new public plazas to be provided by the Port. One, would be in 
the Fisherman's Wharf area, called the Triangle, the parking lot across the 
Embarcadero from the Bay itself. The plaza would be developed over approximately 
70% of that site or about 107,000 square feet; and the remaining 30% would be 
developed for some kind of a market hall or retail commercial development to 
generate the revenues to finance the development of the plaza and allow parking, 
which is now on the surface, to be relocated into an underground garage. She said 
there was still a significant amount of planning to be done with the Fisherman's Wharf 
community; but hopefully there is general agreement that would be a major public 
benefit in the area. 

The next plaza site specified is part of a special planning study in the area between 
Piers 15 and 29, where there is agreement there needs to be a major new access area 
created. Agreement could not be reached as to the specific location of these 
improvements because of the Port's concern to make sure the maritime operations 
currently occupying those facilities were secured and protected and to make sure that 
the historic preservation issues also connected with a number of those structures on 
those facilities have been adequately addressed. Ms. Oshima noted that special 
planning area would be subject to a follow-up process jointly coordinated between 
BCDC, the Port and the Planning Department concerning specific recommendations. 

She indicated the third plaza site would be at the South Beach area of the waterfront, 
south of the Bay Bridge, and would involve removal of Pier 34, which is currently a 



condemned pier, and Pier 36, which is in a deteriorated but still leasable condition, 
with the ultimate creation of a plaza in place of those piers. There would be a net 
reduction in fill but there would still be some pile-supported platform to support the 
plaza in that area. 

As to pier removals, in addition to Piers 34 and 36, the other piers identified for 
removal are Pier 24, also a condemned facility; and one pier in the Piers 15 to 29 
Special Planning Study area; and Pier 33, subject to further historic preservation 
review, since that is a historic structure. Ms. Oshima pointed out there was a separate 
provision in the Concept Agreement to carry out further historic preservation 
planning, which would affect Pier 33 as well. 

To the extent that the Concept Agreement items would be incorporated into the 
Waterfront Plan, there are some overarching Port priorities of the Plan which should 
be noted. A Waterfront Plan Advisory Board, chaired by Chairman Tufts, worked 
over a period of 3 years; and one of that Board's very clear priorities was the need for 
maritime uses to be addressed first. Towards that end, the Advisory Board spent 
almost a year of planning time convening roundtable sessions for every single one of 
the maritime industries located at the Port to find out what their current and future 
needs were. 

Two-thirds of the waterfront is reserved for long-term or current maritime use, mostly 
in the southern part, with some facilities north of China Basin. To the extent any of 
the facilities in the Piers 15 to 29 Special Planning Area could be designated for 
something other than cargo-related uses, which are occupying those facilities now, the 
Plan sets forth policies that the Port Commission would have to consider, and 
formally adopt a resolution to allow those facilities to be used for non-maritime 
purposes before any project other than cargo operations could occupy those sites. 

Ms. Oshima said the Plan emphasizes maritime uses in the form of maritime mixed- 
use developments, where a lot of the implementation of the Concept Agreement would 
come forward. Despite the fact that most of the northern waterfront is no longer 
needed for ship repair or cargo operations, there is still a great desire to have 
modernized cruise terminals, facilities for water taxies, excursion boats, historic 
boats, ship displays, and recreational boating, providing a mix of public access and 
commercial revenue uses on the piers; and the Plan would definitely promote that. 

In terms of potential benefits for the Port from the implementation of the Concept 
Agreement, it would provide regulatory relief for the use of existing Port facilities. 
As pointed out by Ms. Ruffolo, the issue of applying the replacement fill policy to the 
Port's piers has been problematic; and the Agreement would solve this by specifying 
the condition of each one of the Port's pile-supported piers. 

Ms. Oshima indicated that there were essentially two categories here. The green- 



colored piers on the map, which are in Category 1, are in excellent or good condition 
and therefore have a remaining life of 35 to 50 years. Given the long-remaining life 
of these piers, she said it would be worth it to conduct whatever repair and 
maintenance operations, including seismic retrofit, which were necessary to keep them 
in a safe condition and in operation. This would allow the Port to be able to continue 
to use the facilities for leasing and for other uses, whether they be water oriented or 
non- water oriented. 

The red-colored piers, called Category 2, are in a more deteriorated state; and 
therefore, the types of maintenance activities applied there would be more limited. 
The threshold identified in the Concept Agreement would be to allow these piers to be 
repaired up to a point where 25 % of the supporting piles have been replaced. At the 
point the Port engaged in repairs which extended beyond that, and it would be 
monitored cumulatively, the piers would then revert into Bay jurisdiction; and the 
uses would have to meet the water-oriented requirements of the McAteer-Petris Act. 

Ms. Oshima explained that the Concept Agreement also sets forth some conceptual 
ideas for regulating pier reconfiguration. She said the map on the wall identified the 
concepts by defining perimeter lines around each pier or groups of piers, which would 
identify an area within which the Port would be allowed to reshape the piers. There 
would also be pier area limits, which essentially would establish a maximum for how 
much pier acreage would be allowed within most pier perimeter designations. 

Ms. Oshima emphasized that it was not anticipated that pier configurations would be 
very common; construction of new pier facilities is extremely expensive, so this 
would be considered mostly in the context of a major mixed-use maritime project on 
the pier. 

The Port will be carrying out further historic preservation planning for its historic 
resources. 

Ms. Oshima said an initial survey had identified many of the Port's structures to be 
potentially significant National Register structures. In the interest of trying to balance 
maritime historic preservation, public access and bay fill issues, the historic 
preservation planning will be able to have particular resolutions for the Piers 15 to 29 
Special Area Studies and the Pier 33 removal. 

Marc Holmes, representing Save San Francisco Bay Association, observed that when 
the draft Waterfront Land Use Plan was released by the Port, the Association had two 
major concerns. One was that the Plan failed to deal with the provision of public 
access and the second was the expansion for non-conforming uses. 

The Association wrote a letter expressing these concerns in response to the draft 
report; and subsequently BCDC, who shared these and other related concerns, and the 

-7- 



Port staff, who were re-thinking their approach outlined in this Plan, invited the 
Association to participate in the ongoing discussions to resolve these problems. The 
result of these discussions was an expanded public access along San Francisco 
waterfront and a reconsideration of the need to authorize non-conforming uses on fill 
in San Francisco Bay. 

Mr. Holmes said that most of the details on how this came about were in the Concept 
Plan, which recognizes further details will be developed to address both of these 
issues over the coming months. Save San Francisco Bay is very enthusiastic about the 
outcome of the development of the Concept Plan and is eager to continue working on 
it and ultimately memorializing it in a Special Area Plan. 

The Commission opened the public hearings. 

Nan Roth, a member of the Waterfront Planning Advisory Board, who also served on 
the Fisherman's Wharf Citizens Advisory Committee and has been involved in 
waterfront issues since Pier 39 first came under consideration in the mid-1970s, said 
she was not speaking on behalf of those organizations but strictly expressing her own 
personal opinion. 

She commented that the main purpose of the Citizens Advisory Committee was to 
come up with a Fisherman's Wharf Area Plan, but three things would be negatively 
impacted by this Concept Agreement. 

First, the retention of the flavor of Fisherman's Wharf historic and industrial maritime 
past was viewed as one of the primary objectives in planning for the future. The 
tenants of Fish Alley are all maritime-industrial, and this is probably the only area at 
Fisherman's Wharf where the casual visitor can experience close at hand the working 
waterfront. Ms. Roth pointed out there was widespread agreement to protect this area 
as part of the Wharf and to protect its uses as well, yet the Port has been reluctant to 
incorporate it into the Waterfront Plan. 

Ms. Roth believed that of even more concern was the omission of this area from the 
historic resources database. The Fish Alley area was omitted from the database 
because people were misinformed about what parts of Fisherman's Wharf should 
appropriately be included and were told this area was not to be one of them. Because 
of that fact, Ms. Roth thought the consultants should revisit the Fisherman's Wharf 
area and get together with some of the people who worked on the Waterfront Plan, 
which includes a historic resources group. 

She said another prominent feature of the Plan is a proposed 3-level, 660 car, 
underground garage in the area between Taylor, Jefferson and the Embarcadero. It 
would replace surface parking around the Franciscan Restaurant and lead to opening 
that are visually to the Bay. While the Port long opposed the garage concept, it is 

-8- 



now offering to construct it as part of the Concept Agreement. However, there are 
important differences between this proposal and the Fisherman's Wharf Area Plan 
proposal. The Port's garage would be much smaller and would be financed by 
revenues from new and expanded commercial development on the site, and the Port's 
proposal does not contain a commitment to convert the Pier 43- x h area to open space. 

Ms. Roth explained that the Piers 33 and 35 concept, while these piers do not 
technically fall within the Fisherman's Wharf area, were included in the planning 
process because of the importance of the cruise industry to the economy. The 
arbitrary removal of Pier 33 would result in costly restraints on expansion of water 
vessel berthing and adaptability to future use. Moving the cruise terminal to Piers 30 
and 32, which are not as large or as flexible as Piers 33 and 35, would result in far 
less space being dedicated to cruise ships and would leave the issue of multiple 
berthing unresolved. She believed it would be extremely unwise to permit the 
removal of Pier 33 without further consultation with industry experts. 

The Port may not be able to meet the pier removal and open space commitments, and 
Ms. Roth wondered if it would be appropriate to base an agreement on so much 
uncertainty. She did not feel this was a balanced agreement and felt that the needs of 
the public, who wish to restore the Bay, are not being responded to in equal fashion to 
the needs of the Port. 

David Bahlman, representing San Francisco Heritage, underscored Ms. Roth's 
interest in the results of the historic resource study done in November 1996. He said 
the historic finger piers were obviously very important; open space and public access 
are very important but it should not be at the expense of historic resources and, 
specifically, not at the expense of Pier 33. Thirty-three piers in the 1976 survey were 
in the top 2% of the City's architecture. 

San Francisco Heritage's rating of Pier 33 is a rating of "A," structures of the highest 
importance distinguished by outstanding qualities of architectural historic values in 
relationship to the environment. "A" category buildings are likely candidates for 
National Register as well as City Landmark status. Mr. Bahlman urged both 
Commission to take a very good look at those very historic resources of the highest 
quality. 

Jeffrey Heller, Chairman of the SPUR's Waterfront Committee and surveying on the 
Urban Design Technical Advisory Committee for this effort, believed that the event 
today was one of the most important that has been seen on the waterfront and 
congratulated the participants in making this happen. He thought this would be the 
linchpin in making the Waterfront Plan work. 

He commented that, while achieving all of the goals of the Port, BCDC and Save the 
Bay Association as far as access, open space, and water-oriented uses, it was 

-9- 



extremely important that the uses identified in the Plan, which are attempting to be 
realistic and appropriate to especially the northeast waterfront area, be respected in 
the Agreement so there need be no second visit in the approval process. He believed 
what made all the proposals on the San Francisco waterfront not viable for the last 
two decades was the double jeopardy of going through the Port and the City and back 
to BCDC; so the Agreement would be a linchpin and the coming together in 
consensus on the approval of the basic plan. 

As a member of the Technical Advisory Committee, which has been working very 
hard on the issues of public access, open space and urban design guidelines, Mr. 
Heller thought this was perhaps the finest waterfront in the world and should not have 
any billboards on the Bay, floating or otherwise, to take advantage of this marvelous 
waterfront. 

Stewart Morton, Transportation Chair of the (Fisherman's Wharf) Citizens Advisory 
Committee and currently on the Technical Advisory Committee, believed the draft 
Concept Agreement is a very fine document which has taken a lot of hours to get this 
far. 

He thought the one problem was the proposed demolition of Pier 33, a very good 
looking bulkhead and a very important item to retain. The Citizens Advisory 
Committee was informed that Pier 25 and the removal of a little bit of Pier 27 would 
provide open space for an area that needs it but the removal of Pier 33 would not 
achieve that, because there is open space north of Pier 35. He said the historical 
significance of Pier 33 was very important, and its proposed demolition is a big flaw 
in this draft Concept Agreement. 

Commissioner Hughan asked what criteria were used in judging a building to be in the 
top 2% of interest. Mr. Morton responded that there were many elements, such as its 
importance architecturally in showing how maritime business was conducted in the 
City. 

Mr. Bahlman noted that, under the criteria of the National Register evaluative 
process, it is deemed eligible for the National Register. 

Vice Chairman Siracusa asked whether, since this was illustrative of the waterfront, 
there were any other more unique and valuable piers that could be candidates for 
demolition. Mr. Bahlman advised that the piers are of equal importance and 
duplicative in some sense. In this case, the particular configuration of the finger piers 
is unique; and to destroy any of the finger piers that have that level of historic 
importance would be a mistake - once they're gone, they're gone. 

Mr. Bahlman then outlined the four criteria under which a resource can be considered 
for the National Register and said there were eight or nine piers of the same 

-10- 



importance. 

Commissioner Bierman emphasized the importance of Mr. Morton and Mr. Bahlman 
in the historic preservation community of San Francisco and the importance of this 
pier. 

Ellen Johnck, Executive Director of the Bay Planning Coalition, expressed the 
industry's support and the gratification of the numerous members for the coalition 
around the Bay, particularly on the culmination of this process. She said the Coalition 
endorses the Concept Agreement. It is very gratifying because this is really an 
outgrowth of a process begun when BCDC was in jeopardy of losing its budget in 
January of 1995, and the Coalition came together with Save San Francisco Bay 
Association to agree on a program of important reforms and improvements needed to 
streamline BCDC's procedures. One of the topics discussed was expediting permit 
application and review, Design Review Board (DRB) and the Engineering Review 
Board, wetlands restorations, etc., and expediting permit review and approval for 
projects that were routine repair and maintenance around the Bay. The result of the 
discussions is the Concept Agreement, which has been completed. 

Ms. Johnck advised that the Coalition, since that time, has been part of the 
administrative structure of the process and is very gratified to see the parties come 
together. The Coalition believes it is a wonderful model for the future for waterfront 
planning and for continuing to look at the details of this agreement, particularly for 
the piers. This is an excellent opportunity to have a blanket permit for the Port of San 
Francisco and its maintenance, and Ms. Johnck said the Coalition urges staff and the 
group to get on with this. 

Jane Morrison, a member of the Waterfront Land Use Advisory Board, wanted to be 
sure that this Agreement would guarantee that it is the Port's first priority to maintain 
increased commercial shipping, fishing and water activities, including freighters, 
cruise ships, water taxis, docks for visiting boats. She emphasized that the waterfront 
should be saved for future waterfront needs and kept open for public access and use of 
the Bay. It should be like a public park where people can enjoy the view and relax, 
but the most exciting views of the Bay are the cargo ships and other watercraft that 
can be seen. 

She believed there was no need for of all the waterfront to be turned into a shopping 
complex or hotels or any activity that does not need to be on the water. She realized 
the Port needs income, but they have ample space on some of the piers. Piers 30/32 
could be developed and earn money for the Port. 

As to the 25 % of the revenue from new development that would be applied to public 
spaces, Ms. Morrison wanted to include revenue from the Ferry Building and the 
Giants' Stadium. 



11 



Commissioner Bruzzone commented that the hard work of Jane Morrison in San 
Francisco Tomorrow should be acknowledged, as well as the efforts of Supervisor 
Bierman, in placing the proposition on the ballot to stop waterfront development in 
San Francisco until the Plan had been carefully discussed and reached this point. 

Jennifer Clary, representing San Francisco Tomorrow, thanked the staffs of the Port 
and BCDC for being extremely helpful, meeting with her group several times and 
explaining this document. She was not sure what the special area study was going to 
consist of and assumed it would have something to do with the Historic Resources 
Report. She agreed with San Francisco Heritage that any action on Pier 33 should be 
delayed until the Historic Resources Report has been completed. 

She asked that the Historic Resources Plan be extended northward to cover Fish 
Alley. 

Ms. Clary referred to the statement on page 3 on public access to piers, which says 
that at least 25% will be public access and more on larger piers, and said it really 
needed to be defined more precisely. She said the Technical Advisory Committee is 
working on it, but they really have not expanded on it or improved on the definition. 

As to the evaluation for Categories 1 and 2 piers, Ms. Clary wondered if that was the 
result of an independent study. She stated she did not know there were that many 
piers in good condition. 

Also, according to the public access requirement on Category 2 piers, there could be 
as little as zero public access, which does not make sense if there is going to be a 
public access requirement. She thought that, if it were going to be reduced to 25 % , it 
should apply to interim uses as well as new development, because that would make it 
more attractive to the Port to do interim uses instead of actually creating new 
developments. 

She asked for a more specific definition of the requirement for new maritime uses 
providing maximum feasible public access and believed that "feasible" is much too 
flexible a word, and she would like to see that eliminated, if possible. 

Ms. Clary hoped the discussions with the DRB would be public and that there would 
be public hearings so that, however this comes out, it will not reduce public input on 
waterfront projects. 

Ms. Clary asked that there be a mailing list of interested groups maintained, to include 
everyone who is part of the waterfront planning process. Also, she pointed out that 
for somebody who works Monday through Friday, the last 7 months had been 
difficult, despite having a very nice employer. She wondered if, once in a while, 
there could be an evening or weekend meeting. 



12 



Vice Chairman Siracusa moved, seconded by Commissioner Corbin to close the 
public hearing. The motion was carried by voice vote. 

In answer to Chairman Tufts' question on the Pier 33 matter, Ms. Oshima stated that 
copies could be provided. She said the Historic Resources Report was done for the 
Port by Architectural Resources Group, which did the survey based on the National 
Register criteria and the recommendations of that report were that most of the 
bulkhead buildings fronting along the Embarcadero and many of the pier sheds 
connected to those bulkheads and the piers themselves look as if they are potentially 
eligible for the National Register as a historic district, as opposed to individual 
resources. Pier 33 is like the other ones, but there are differences in groupings, and 
there was concern expressed about removing one of those piers that could upset that 
grouping. 

In terms of the Waterfront Land Use Plan, Piers 33 and 35 have been identified as 
potential sites for cruise operations. If Pier 33 were removed, it could cause some 
hardship in trying to accommodate a modernized cruise terminal in this location. She 
pointed out, however, that Piers 27 and 29 also have been identified as potential sites 
for cruise terminals. She said if the cruise terminal would like to be kept in this 
particular area, there is another site, which has been specifically identified in the Plan, 
which might meet many of the objectives. 

In terms of whether to remove the pier or not, Ms. Oshima pointed out that this 
Concept Agreement was based on a presumption that there would be a net reduction 
of fill in the Bay through pier removals and that the piers that have been identified in 
the Concept Agreement would total on the order of half a million square feet. If Pier 
33 were not to be removed and were left in place, that is about 85,000 square feet; so 
one would still be looking at a 415,000 square foot reduction. 

In answer to Vice Chairman Siracusa's question, Ms. Oshima indicated that Pier 35 is 
a larger pier than 33 and that the cruise industry feels that, essentially these long, 
rectangular piers are not very efficient, because modern cruise terminals operate like 
airports. The baggage loading and services are going on at one level; passenger 
activities are at another. Right now cruise passengers are intermingling with the 
forklifts and ship servicing equipment down on the ground floor in the shed, which 
creates a chaotic situation that would be exacerbated further if there were two ships 
calling at the Port at the same time. 

Commissioner Goldzband inquired whether the 500,000 sq. ft. was a sacrosanct 
number. He believed that there might be 85,000 sq. ft. somewhere else. Ms. Oshima 
replied that the Port did not go into the negotiations with some preconceived notion 
about what fill should be removed, although fill removal was a clear objective. 

Mr. Holmes believed it was important to understand what the genesis of this was, and 

-13- 



it was not an arbitrary number decided upon before the discussions began. He said, 
currently, if the Port wishes to develop uses on piers, it comes to BCDC for a permit, 
and the Port comes with an application for commercial use, like Pier 39, which is an 
approved use under the Bay Plan and approved from the State Lands Commission's 
point of view, but the existing rule is, if you put in something like that, then you have 
to remove 50% of the amount of fill that you are proposing to build on; and. you can 
put public access on the rest or not. So, essentially, for that type of development, you 
have a fifty-fifty split. 

Mr. Holmes explained that they created a somewhat arbitrary and unpredictable 
permit situation for the Port. From the Association's point of view, the fact that you 
could release that and have willy-nilly commercial development on fill was 
unsatisfactory; and the conclusion was to have a plan that specifies a limited number 
of square footage to be removed so one gets certainty where the public access is going 
to come in and from a development point of view, one knows where one can develop 
and what kind of concessions have to be made from the public access point of view. 

Commissioner Goldzband asked why Pier 33 was selected, as opposed to Pier 35. 
Mr. Holmes told him that was the Port's suggestion, and he did not want to speak for 
the Port. Particular areas were suggested in order to match the land side and the 
rhythm of open space, and a lot of this information was developed by the Design 
Technical Advisory Committee to create a waterfront-wide rhythm of open space that 
matched the land side. 

Ms. Ruffolo reiterated this was a negotiated outcome and that when the more heavy 
duty series of negotiations began in November, Save the Bay and BCDC originally 
were asking for removal of Piers 19 and 23 or possibly 15 and 17, feeling that the 
balance of water and open space necessary to make sense of waterfront access and 
improving views and elimination of fill by removing piers no longer needed for 
maritime purposes deserved that level of fill removal. Pier 33 removal was suggested 
by the Port, but BCDC staff is not particularly wedded to Pier 33 over some other 
pier. 

Ms. Oshima noted that, while she could not recall that it was the Port's suggestion to 
remove Pier 33, the Port was responding to a stated objective or concern by BCDC 
and Save the Bay for the regularly-spaced open water areas. Piers 19 and 23 were also 
suggested by BCDC and Save the Bay as potential open water areas. Concern was 
also expressed about the lack of open water area from Pier 31 up to Pier 35, so the 
proposal to remove Pier 33 was in response to their concern; but given the concerns 
being aired today, it is clearly an area the port will have to take a more careful look 
at, to see if that is the right place for it. 

Ms. Oshima said that, on the map, Pier 33 is hatched because of the historic 
preservation issue versus the other pier removal sites that the Port feels more 

-14- 



confident about, but more historic preservation planning will be done. If there is 
another site that can be identified in lieu of Pier 33, another look will definitely be 
taken. 

In answer to Commissioner Hughan's questions, Ms. Oshima stated that various sites 
were believed suitable for passenger ship terminals but there has been consistent 
concern expressed to keep the cruise terminal in this area. Piers 30/32 are part of the 
MUNI Metro extension of light rail. 

Commissioner Hughan said, as a resident of San Francisco, he would take his visitors 
to Pier 33 and 35, which seem more desirable, because you're looking at North Beach 
and Fisherman's Wharf and Telegraph Hill, as opposed to the other piers. Ms. 
Oshima noted comments were heard not only from the preservation community but 
others who enjoy the fact that this is an urban waterfront and unique to the Bay 
shoreline. 

In answer to Vice Chairman Siracusa's question, Mr. Travis commented that policies 
need not be developed today. The Concept Agreement is a status report of the 
direction that is being taken, and both the Port and BCDC and Save the Bay will 
continue in this direction, and the ultimate objective is to come up with a Special Area 
Plan. The discussion on Pier 33 will be really easy to revisit. The Concept 
Agreement will not be adopted. It is really an expression of the staffs work and the 
direction being taken. He said the policies may be far reaching, but they are vague. 
Staffs have been advised by the Attorney General's office not to adopt this. 

Replying to Chairman Siracusa's inquiry, Mr. Travis stated that if one is taking a 
pier, removing it, and putting in a replacement, then the rule is fifty percent. Mr. 
Travis explained these are special rules that apply on the San Francisco waterfront, 
and which were designed specifically to try to encourage the removal of obsolete 
piers. 

Mr. Travis pointed out that, as these negotiations were entered into, there were 
several fundamental goals: More of the bay should be uncovered than is covered now; 
more and better public access should be provided; and greater regulatory flexibility 
should be provided to the Port to, in essence, get BCDC out of the micro management 
of Port affairs and to give a faster regulatory process and greater certainty. He 
assured the Commission that staff would keep moving and would come back to the 
Commission with status reports and public hearings as one moves toward the adoption 
of the Special Area Plan. 

Chairman Tufts believed it was fair to conclude on behalf of everybody that there 
should be direction to BCDC staff to take another look at Pier 33 to see if a substitute 
could be made. He asked what the status of the amendment to the Jones Act was on 
the federal level. 



-15 



Paul Osmundson, Director of Planning and Development for the Port, said that the 
Port is working with a coalition of ports and travel industry groups to put together a 
legislation amending the Passenger Services Act, which is happening right now. If this 
should pass, the potential of cruise ships visiting San Francisco would dramatically 
increase, doubling the number of cruise ship calls. He said currently there are 50 ship 
calls each year. 

Chairman Tufts commented that if there were a likelihood that the Passenger Services 
Act would be amended and that cruise ship visits would be increased dramatically, 
this should be considered in connection with the Pier 33 controversy. 

Commissioner Bierman pointed out that the Citizens Advisory Committee had 
recommended the retention of Pier 33. She said she was slightly appalled that, after 
that committee worked as hard as it did and it had many of the same people who were 
on the tour today, that the historic preservation of Pier 33 was given so little 
importance. She was glad that the issue would be revisited. 

Mr. Holmes explained that when this Concept Plan is fleshed out, it will be 
incorporated as a public access element in the Waterfront Land Use Plan. He pointed 
out that the Plan says nothing about land use or public access; so where a cruise 
terminal goes is entirely determined by the Waterfront Land Use Plan; and there have 
not been any discussions as to where it should go. The discussions were to address 
the complete lack of absence of a public access plan in the Waterfront Land Use Plan. 

He added that, as pertains to Pier 33 particularly, the request was made to leave the 
flexibility in the Port's hands to reconfigure Pier 33 for unspecified uses, including a 
cruise terminal. It was agreed not to remove the facade building, as distinguished 
from the pier and the pier shed building. The staffs never agreed nor recommend that 
the bulkhead buildings be removed but agreed to the flexibility to reconfigure Pier 33 
and accommodate unspecified uses. 

Ms. Ruffolo reiterated that it was never contemplated to remove the bulkhead 
building, merely the pier itself. BCDC's current regulations allow for the 
reconfiguration and repair of structures of historic significance that are on pier or 
bulkhead buildings, such as the Ferry Building and they can be reconfigured and 
repaired for non-water-oriented uses. 

Commissioner Bruzzone remarked that it appeared that give-and-take from Save the 
Bay, the Port and BCDC need to be made available within the process and augmented 
to include the collaboration from those who are concerned with historical structures, 
since it obviously could be damaging to the overall effort. He suggested to bring 
these people in not as signatories to the agreement but as more active participants. 

Chairman Tufts suggested to get maximum input from the San Francisco Heritage and 

-16- 



other societies that have historic concerns. Ms. Oshima told him that those efforts 
have started. There have been initial meetings, and San Francisco Heritage has 
agreed to set up a subcommittee of their Issues Committee, to provide guidance and 
advice in what needs to happen in the historic preservation planning that the Port has 
committed to under this Concept Agreement. 

Commissioner Bruzzone said that he had been present at the time the Agreement was 
announced at the Waterfront Advisory Committee meeting, and the signator at that 
time was Dennis Bouey, and he wanted to make sure that the current Port Executive 
Director, Mr. Wong, concurs with this Agreement. 

Port Executive Director Douglas Wong assured everyone that the Port is definitely 
moving forward with the Agreement and everyone is completely satisfied. 

In answer to Commissioner Bruzzone' s question, Ms. Ruffolo said she believed the 
president of San Francisco Tomorrow had misconstrued the policy in the Agreement. 
The 25% is to be applied to all finger piers, regardless of interim or permanent uses. 

As to other piers where an interim use is going to be planned which is currently a 
container terminal, if that comes before BCDC before any policy changes are made, 
the current rules would apply and maximum feasible public access consistent with the 
project would have to be provided. If it should come after the Special Area Plan 
amendments are made, there would be guidelines in the Urban Design Public Access 
element in the Plan that would specify the extent of public access that would have to 
be provided on the larger piers. 

Replying to a question from Chairman Tufts, Ms. Oshima pointed out that the 25% 
on-site pier public access requirement would apply when a finger pier was newly 
developed with a new maritime commercial recreation type of use. She explained 
that, for the most part, interim uses are leases of those structures that currently stand 
on those piers. If there were a shed on a pier and the Port wanted to lease it short 
term to a warehouse operator, they would be able to lease the space without having to 
meet a public access requirement, because they essentially would be using the existing 
facilities. 

If there were to be a new development project that involved a major change to the 
facility, then the 25% or greater, if on a larger-sized pier, public access requirement 
would apply. She said that recognizes that the Port is providing up-front commitment 
for the creation of these plazas. The creation of this public access fund would take 
25% of development revenues and develop and create the plazas. 

As to the ballpark and the Ferry Building projects, the policies, as proposed, will 
come into effect once they're adopted. As to the ballpark project in particular, there 
is a lot of detailed regulatory planning already being done for this project, which is on 

-17- 



file. It is probably not going to be subject to this requirement because a lot of public 
access planning and internal financing and regulatory review is already being 
addressed. 

Ms. Oshima commented that, as to the Ferry Building project, one would have to see 
when these policies take place to determine whether the Ferry Building would be 
subject to the 25%, although the expense to restoring the Ferry Building will be so 
large that the Port does not anticipate that as a revenue project. 

The significance of the public access fund is furthered by the fact that the Port has 
designated developments on the seawall lots to also contribute revenues into that 
public access fund, which is an area where BCDC does not have jurisdiction; but it is 
recognized that pier developments having more limited ability to generate potential, 
given the public access and more time requirements. Ms. Oshima explained that a 
large part of the public access funds would be coming from the new developments on 
the seawall lots. 

In answer to Vice Chairman Siracusa's question, Ms. Oshima advised that there was 
nothing sacrosanct about the 500,000 square feet or about Pier 33. She said the Port 
would be more than happy to negotiate another location for open water if Pier 33 is 
not suitable. While the figure of 500,000 square feet is not sacrosanct, negotiation is 
balanced between the need to allow developable pier and the corresponding 
requirement to create open water and public access. 

Commissioner Carruthers observed that he has been in the area since 1950 and 
believed that the bulkheads along the waterfront have always been notably ugly. He 
thought the idea of providing views across the Bay was much more important, and the 
argument for seeing more waterfront activity had his entire sympathy. 

The purpose of the bulkheads was to provide a uniform screen for a rather haphazard 
kind of activity, and Commissioner Carruthers saw no purpose in preserving the 
bulkheads for their own sake. They do serve the purpose of providing a facade along 
the Embarcadero to that extent their activities are meaningful and useful, but he 
couldn't see any purpose in preserving the bulkheads for their own sake. He said the 
fish processing activities associated with Fisherman's Wharf might be as much of a 
historical district concept as the bulkheads along the Embarcadero. 

Commissioner Carruthers asked what the process would be for the consideration of 
the comments that had been brought to the Port and the BCDC Commissions at this 
hearing. Ms. Ruffolo replied that, throughout the discussions and the preparation of 
the report, BCDC staff had been meeting with San Francisco Tomorrow, and Stewart 
Morton and others from San Francisco Heritage had attended a number of those 
meetings, so there has already been a pattern established of working with them to air 
questions and get their input before moving ahead and working with the Port. She 

-18- 



emphasized that BCDC staff intends to continue working with them that way. 

BCDC staff talked with the Port about a joint effort with San Francisco Tomorrow 
and interested parties on the waterfront, including the Fisherman's Wharf merchants 
and she said there had been an opportunity for interested groups and parties to 
respond to various activities. BCDC will move forward and so will the Port, with the 
Historic Resources Study as well as the Special Area Study of Piers 15 to 27. There's 
a whole array of ongoing projects which require somewhat specified opportunities for 
public input, depending on the affected interested group but this process has already 
been started. 

Commissioner Carruthers was very encouraged, because the Commission had set up a 
committee to promote outreach regarding BCDC programs. 

Ms. Oshima emphasized that the whole effort has been community-based, with an 
already established process at the Port. So to the extent there is interaction and 
coordination of the issues, the framework is there; and the Advisory Board will be 
brought together periodically, as well as other various community groups. 

She indicated that the Port knew Pier 33 was an issue. In fact, alternate sites were 
offered to provide the pier removal requirements, which was intended to be a part of 
the further details that will be dealt with BCDC and Save the Bay. 

Commissioner Rose, referring to Nan Roth's comments on the protection of Fish 
Alley, noted that since the purpose of this meeting was to get a sense of the feelings of 
the Commission and the Port, she would like to register her comments about the Pier 
33 preservation. 

She said the structure is quite handsome; there are historic districts in Marin, such as 
all of downtown Sausalito, which tend to protect those areas. She hoped that Fish 
Alley would be preserved, enhancing the amenities for the fishing industry both by 
retaining the existing character, by not allowing other uses to push out maritime 
activities and by preserving the character. 

Ms. Oshima pointed out that the Port has put in major resources for the fishing 
industry and the preservation of Fish Alley was a big topic in the Waterfront Plan 
Advisory Board proceedings. Essentially what is happening is there is a grouping of 
warehouses that have been recognized as reflective of the historic fishing activity that 
is currently at the Wharf, but they don't always meet the modernized needs of the fish 
processing and handling facilities. Many of the operators who have long-term leases 
for some of those facilities were finding they were unable to use the facilities for their 
fish handling operations, and so it was in the interest of maintaining the ability to keep 
those structures intact that the notion of the interim adapted uses was allowed, under 
limited circumstances, in the Fish Alley facilities. 

-19- 



Ms. Oshima advised that the Port of San Francisco had just put in $14 million worth 
of improvements to Pier 45 and created a modernized fish handling facility that drew a 
lot of the fish operations into that pier, which meets current health codes and provides 
the kind of facilities that are not always found at the Fish Alley operation. 

In regard to the Pier 31-33-35 area and the question of the apparent conflict about 
views and public access and historic resources, the Urban Design guidelines and the 
Technical Advisory Committee have identified openings within those existing historic 
structures that could break through to the water. The large roll-up type garage doors, 
60 feet wide and 30 feet in height, if one were to open those up, would give a clear 
view and also satisfy the historic preservation objectives. Those points are spelled out 
in the Urban Design Guidelines. 

Chairman Tufts believed the concept approach was a good one and if one took each 
project case by case and applied BCDC standards, it would be stifling for a lot of 
development of the Port. Taking the overall approach and applying BCDC standards 
would be very worthwhile for the Port, BCDC and the public in general; and that is 
what this concept intends to do. Secondly, he said one was not trying to micro 
manage things but as each project came along, it would have to come to BCDC and 
the Port to get approval. Chairman Tufts urged staff to continue on its course and to 
take into consideration all of the questions and issues that have been raised, 
particularly about Pier 33. 

Chairman Tufts believed a lot of work had gone into this and that the staffs of both 
agencies deserve a great deal of praise from everyone. He said he was very excited 
about this meeting and believed it would set a precedent possibly for BCDC and the 
Port to work very closely together on each project as it comes along and have joint 
meetings similar to today's. He thought it not only streamline the process but the 
work product was so much better when all involved parties hear everyone's concerns. 

Port Commission President Michael Hardeman said he had been informed by the 
Port's counsel that the Port Commission had to conclude its meeting at this point. He 
thanked BCDC, the Waterfront Planning Committee and everyone on the staffs, 
agreeing totally with Mr. Travis' comments that this is a conceptual thing and nothing 
is locked in. Nobody has made any solid commitments to do anything as far as the 
removal of Pier 33. He emphasized that was not the Port Commission's position but a 
suggestion by the former Port Director to address certain concerns. It was never 
approved by the Port Commission nor even considered. The Port Commission has 
taken no position on this and President Hardeman felt that everyone at the meeting 
should leave feeling that nobody has any predetermined positions as to what the 
waterfront is going to look like. The process will be continued. He thought it was 
amazing that the process had gotten this far. 

Port Commission Vice President Frankie Lee said he appreciated this joint effort of 

-20- 



BCDC and the Port which is a historic first. He noted that, before the meeting, he 
had the pleasure of talking to Chairman Tufts and that they both agreed that this joint 
hearing should be a model for other bay area agencies that have common interests and 
concerns and who can work together and come up with terrific concepts. 

Mr. Lee emphasized that the Port's clients are the public and that the Port serves the 
public and this was a great day for the Port and he hoped for BCDC as well. 

The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m. 



F:\COREL\AGENDA97\MINUTES\3696MIN.WPD 



21 - 



# 



.SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

REGULAR MEETING DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

4:00 P.M. . (MARCH 11. 1990 ' 

FERRY BUILDING, SUITE 3100 MAK ° 6 1997 

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO 

PUBLIC LIBRARY 

AGENDA 

J i 

Vpl 1. ROLL CALL 

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 25, 1997 Special Meeting & Regular Meeting 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Executive Director's Report 

4. MARITIME 

5. REAL ESTATE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

A. Authorization to award Contract 2631, "Fisherman's Wharf Lighting Improvements, 
Phase 1." (Resolution No. 97-24) 

B. Authorization to award Contract 2622, "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit Project." 
(Resolution No. 97-19) 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. Approval of payment to the State of California, Department of Transportation, for 
acquisition of the Caltrans property bounded by King, Berry, 2nd and 3rd Streets and 
described generally as Assessor's Block 3794 for the new ballpark at China Basin and 
endorsement of the execution of a non-binding agreement between the City and 
CalTrans. (Resolution No. 97-23) 

8. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 

9. CONSENT CALENDAR 

A. Approval of Port staff representative to attend the American Industrial Hygiene 
Conference and Exposition in Dallas, Texas. (Resolution No. 97-21) 



A031197.igq 



B. Approval for the Director of Finance and Administration to attend an American 
Association of Port Authorities Port Administration and Information Technology 
Seminar in Secaucus, New Jersey, on April 23-25, 1997. (Resolution No. 97-22) 

C. Approval of lease with S&C Ford of San Francisco for 66,000 sq. ft. of shed space at 
Pier 50, Shed "C" (Mission Rock Street at Terry Francois Blvd.) (Resolution No. 
97-20) 

10. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

11. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 



closed to any non-Citv/Port representative. 



* 



1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to an\ non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Pier 80 

Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*NorCal Representative : Mike Sangiacomo, President and Don Moriel, Executive 
Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and NorCal, regarding the property located at Pier 80. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to any non-City /Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Mission Bay bordered by Illinois Street and 
Terry Francois Blvd. and Mission Rock Street 



A031197.igq 



Person Negotiating : Port representative: V. Fei Tsen, Director of Real Estate 
t and Asset Management 

*Catellus Representative : Doug Stimpson, Vice President and CFO, Bay Area 
Development 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and Catellus, regarding the property located at Mission Bay. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

D. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions 
(S.F. Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 

12. ADJOURNMENT 

Public comment is permitted on any matter within Port jurisdiction, and is not limited to 
agenda items. Public comment on non-agenda items may be raised during New 
Business/Public Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the Commission 
Secretary . 



> 



> 



A031197.igq 



-3- 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMORANDUM 



March 5, 1997 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 

Douglas F. Wong JlJ 
Executive Director 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



SUBJECT: Authorization to award Contract 263 L 
Improvements Phase I" 



'Fisherman's Wharf Lighting 



DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: THAT THE COMMISSION AUTHORIZE STAFF 
TO AWARD CONTACT 2631, "FISHERMAN'S WHARF LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS 
PHASE I," IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION 

At the October 16, 1996 meeting, the Commission approved the conceptual design of the 
Fisherman's Wharf Lighting Improvements Phase I and gave staff approval to advertise for 
competitive bids for the construction of these improvements. 

On February 21, 1997, six (6) bids were received. A Summary of Bids is attached. The lowest 
bidder, K. P. Lam Construction, submitted a request to withdraw its bid of $218,000 and bid 
bond. The bidder alleged that one of its subcontractors failed to fully estimate the work. The 
next adjusted low bidder is Millard Tong Construction at a low bid of $299,888. This firm is 
a certified MBE firm. 

Staff has reviewed the bid documents and the Human Rights Commission has reviewed and 
agreed that the MBE/WBE subcontracting goals have been met by Millard Tong Construction. 
Staff recommends that the Commission approve the withdrawal of the K. P. Lam Construction 
bid , approve the award of Contract 263 1 to Millard Tong Construction, authorize a 1 0% 
contingency for possible Type I modifications and authorize the Executive Director to accept 
the work after it is complete. 



Prepared by Cliff Jarrard, Chief Harbor Engineer 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM 6A 



I:\wp51\agd-2631.cj 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-24 

WHEREAS, at the October 16, 1996 meeting the Commission gave staff approval to 
advertise Contact 263 1 ; and 

WHEREAS, on February 21, 1997, six (6) bids were received; and 

WHEREAS, the lowest bidder, K. P. Lam Construction, submitted a request to withdraw 
its bid of $2 1 8,000 and bid bond because the bidder alleged that one of its 
subcontractors failed to fully estimate the work; and 

WHEREAS, the next adjusted low bidder was Millard Tong Construction at a low bid of 
$299,888; and 

WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the bid documents and determined that the bid documents 
are in order; and 

WHEREAS, the Human Rights Commission has reviewed the bids and determined that 
this contractor has met the MBE/WBE subcontracting goals and that the 
contractor qualifies for the bid preference; therefore be it 

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby approves the withdrawal of 
the bid of K. P. Lam Construction; and be it further 

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby authorizes the award of 
Contract 2631, "Fisherman's Wharf Lighting Improvements, Phase I," to 
Millard Tong Construction, the next adjusted low bidder at a cost of 
$299,888, authorizes a 10% contingency for possible Type I contract 
modifications; and be it further 

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission authorizes the Executive Director to 
accept the work after it is complete. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of March 11, 1997. 



Secretary 



I:\wp51\agd-2631.cj 



CO 



CD C5 

CD — *- 
CO TO ,_- 



CD CD 



O 



O a 



0> 2 2 5i 

»- — ra re 
0.(J 2 0. 



< 

LL 

Z 
< 
CO 

LL 

o 

r- 

o 

0. 






CM 



o 

L!_ 



o 
o 

o 

m 



CO 

"ra 

n 

o S 

2 o 

E 2 



o uj 

5 "o 

> © 

2 o* 



to en 

— CN 



a ° 

o ra 

o — 

s" s 

a. o 



o 
i- 



o 

3 CD 

i: > 

c/5 <£ 

O O 

O § 

2> m 

o c 

r- ro 



CO o Z. 

O - C" 



o 

CO " 



:> r> co % — 



cd 

> o 

ra 5 

ra » 

2 O < 

CO 



S m O 



L? CO 
o OJ 



d s 



in 

t 

© O 

r> CO o 

CO _J i» 
^ Q. 

O 



O CD 

2 < 

„ CD CT w 

5 > <• o w 
ra ! < o 



N v O W U 

CO ° — °- 

c_ o 



co CO 



o ^ 



O 
O 

CO 
CO 
CO 

CD~ 

CD 

CNJ 

fee 



o 
o 

CO 
CO 

CO 

cd~ 

CD 
CNJ 
fee 



O 
O 

O 
O 
O 

cd" 

CD 
CM 
fee 



O 
O 

O 
O 
O 

cd" 
cd 

CM 
fee 



O 
O 

O 
O 
O 

CO" 

T— 

CM 

fee 



o 
o 

o 
o 
o 

CO* 
CM 

*e 



CO 



o 
o 

0" 

CO 
CO 

cd" 
cd 

CM 
fee 



o 



o 

LU 



— O 
CO ^ 

ra o 



o 
o 
in 



o 
CO « 



= 20 O 



.2 



O 

r- CO 






O 
O 

ci 
o 
o 

CD" 
Ci 
CM 

fee 



o 

1- 



Z 03 



c\j en 

CO 

co 



■fl- 
ea 

o < 



W 

c 
o 
O 
_: O r 

2 2: CO 



CM 

CM 

> o 2. 



CO " 



o 
o 

o 
o 
o 

co" 

CM 
fc9- 



O 



O) 



_ r— CO 
O "^ t- ir- 

o -= 

a a 

s ■- 

P o 



CD 

< 

O 
CO 



CO 



X Q. 

in 



LU 


a 






















































.2 S 
















































J2 U 






^» 




LJ 


■c O 






_o 


"C 


5 


.2 3T 






"^ 


C3 


O 


- 1 "3 


















O 

to 


75 


"ttj 


5 
^ 






O 




'.^ 


a. 5 






O 


— 


_~ 


— 








^r 


u 


^ 


in 










U 10 








UJ 


ul 


(J C3 


re 






LL 


5 



O _ 

cd ra 




1- 




*i 














































(2 


O 























re "-5 
•— 2 
LU " 



O 
O 

O 
LO 
O) 

CO" 

uo 



o 
o 


10 

co' 

Ci 
IT) 
69- 



O 
O 

O 
O 
O 

ctT 

in 
fee- 



o 
o 

d 
o 
o 

ci 

in 
fee- 



CD 
o 

a 
a 

ci 
a 

fee 



o 
o 

^r 

CD 
Ci 

d 
Ci 

"? 

fee 



co 



5 "^ 
•■= .2 

f =c! 1 1 § 

Q •- — — o 

- " C3 JZ. 

■S = u to 

I/) j- -r 

'F To — w 

E ™ O (7 

3 0^ = 

LL O cu ra 



S P 
CO o 



O 
O 

d 

m 

CD 

CO 
CD 

in 
fee 



o 
o 

d 
o 
o 

cd" 

in 
fee- 



CD 
o 

^r 

CD 
CD 

CD" 
CD 

fee 



re 
o 

r- 



( 



m 




r- 








U) 




d 




03 




d) 


. 


^ 




CU 
CO 


to 

sz 


CM 




c 


CD 


a 




Cl> 


2 
->> 


eg 




■J 


CD 




r> 


■3 


■o 




o 


u 


o 




CM 


Q. 


o 
o 


o 


o 


o 






JZ 


<o 


<o 


Q. 


U 


Q 


Q. 



M 



— r: 'T 



3 o 

< 



O 



_: » 



*- co -- 









> 



O ,- T- 



<> 


— 


T 


a> 


<D 


- 


o 


,1 


LU 


^' 


< 


CNI 


"3 

10 

o 


cd 

2 


r J 




O 


£. 


CO 





— > 

<2 < 

5 2^ 

a = ~> 

?5 " 

o — 

I- « < 

•a w O 

I § u: 

2 co to i ~ 



_ o 



CD 
O 







-3 
0) 


>8 




LL. 




■c 


* 05 




o 


>■ o 




c 
o 


cr z 




a. 
O 
in 

2 


< < 




5 Z 




CU 


3< 






to a> 






9S 






m H 






g 






o 






a. 




CD 

S 




__ 


(0 




a 


2 




U1 






(5 


t- 




— 


o 




n 


o 

c 




cfl 






~ 


01 




O 


lli 




S 


T! 




> 
o 


o 






o 




o. 






" — 


a. 



o 
> 

< 

a 

_C0 

« O 

— a 

<-> ■= 

CD c 

?s 

o cm 

a> cd 

03 -<r 



o 

O ■«- 

~ < 5 
1° 



c 

o © 

s > 

y < 

i en 



CO 


i0 


a 


o 

o 


O 


2 


— 


=0 


r 1 


— 


T 


c 


> 

CO 


cd 
< 


o 

o 

LO 

in 





o 


< • 


t~ 




l.-; 




T 


it: 




CO 





to 


CO 




o 


Li. 


CSI 




d 




2 














o 

o 


CO 


o 


c 



0. 


O 



y 



>->->- 



>>>>-> 



< < 

z z 



>>>>>->-> 



> > >- 



>>>>>- 



< < 

z z 



>->>->>>-> > 



>- > > 



>>>>-> 



< < 

z z 



>->>>->>->- >- 






m 



>->->- 



>>>>->%%> 



>->>>->- > 



>- > > 



>>->>>- 



< < 



>>>>>>>- >- 



CM T ■•- O O — 

O O t- CM CO CO 

n n t t ▼ T 

o o o c o o 

o o c o o o 



o i- n n t 

CD CD CD CD CD 

•<r T V T T 

o o o o c 

o o o o c 



> Z S 



o 



CO — 



LO LO 

— .a 



C 2. 



a 

r- t0 






U Jr L= 



- 2 ■■= ™ ra 

CO 1 1 ~ ^-* 



< w - "3 



C 

o 
■a 
■a 
< 



o 
C2 
-g 

5 



0) 

S o 

si 

•2 3 

co o 



CO CO 



CJ O 

°- t 

x «2 

LI) _i 



o X 



< _l 

^ 21 Si. 

= -3 -a 

3 cu CJ 

o £ iz 

U. u U 

Q CO CO 

fv O O 

cc cr 







o 


i> 


U 




35 




E 

CO 
O) 

o 


CO 
CO 

o 

CU 

Q 


01 

CO 

> 
a; 

cv 


CO 

Ui 

CL 

00 

3 
CD 


a 


c 

LU 

tt) 
> 
to 




n 


0) 








C 


CO 

CM 

F 


Q. 

!£ 

to 

CD 


cr 

CO 


CO 

a3 

c 

0) 

CD 


Q. 

E 

LU 


o 
11 


O 
Q. 
u> 

CU 

rr 




O 




n 


C) 




LL. 


C 




to 


O 


T= 


■o 

CU 


o 

cr 

X 


0) 
Q. 

n 


c 

CO 

3 


a> 

£. 

en 


CO 

3 
rr 


a 
u 

co 


b 

CU 
CU 


< 


a 


I 


LU 


i: 


LJ 







' 














o 




o 












o 


o 




o 












o 


o 




o 












o 


o 




o 












o 


o 




a> 












T- 




















CD 
















t>- 


^ 




LO 












LO 


LO 




6^- 












TT 


V* 




~~" 












V* 




















o 




a 












o 


o 




o 












o 


^ 




a> 












Lf) 


cr> 




CD 












en 


o> 




CD 












CD 


o> 




CD 












CD 


o 




•T 












■<T 


f 




«* 












^r 


v»- 




^ 












<A- 




















o 




O 












O 


o 




O 












o 


CO 




CD 












CD 


CO 




co 












CD 


CO 




CD 












CO 




















a> 




CD 












en 


0> 




CN 












<o 


CN 




cy» 












CM 


v> 




*" 












wy 


o 
















o 


o 
















o 


o 
















o 


o 
















o 


o 
















o 




















en 
















en 


en 
















CD 


CM 
















CM 


v> 
















%»► 


















o 


o 




O 












o 


o 




o 












o 






o 












o 




















o 




CJ 


<^» 


*/> 


w» 


f« 


h<* 




o 




CU 








^^ 


* — * 


CO 


CO 




^« 












CD 


^■» 




CN 












v 


CM 




cy> 












** 


fA 




' — 














A 
















▲ 






O 


~5 

O 




S? 


LO 


o 








T— 








r» 


























o 








































































ro 
















■3 


o 














■o 




















CD 


a 














CD 


~m 


co" 














T3 
O 


O 


CO 

re 














Cfl 




co 

LU 


LU 

m 


LU 

m 


LU 
CD 
_l 


> 


> 


> 


■D 
< 




o 

-z. 


2 


§ 


-j 


— > 


—I 






LU 


















cr 


















LU 


















u. 


















LU 


















cr 


















0- 

















co t^ 

w. o 

3 o 

CT _- — 

oj co 

co -c £ 

_ CD 

CD ^ u. 

£& 2 

"3-3 O 

•~ o a o 

Q. U Q C 





M 




3 


o 


L_ 


o 


^ 


CO 


3 


>o 


5 


a: z 




< < 


o 


2f? 




s^ 


a 


D < 




03 W 




9S 




fflh 




Q£ 


w 


O 


2 


CL 


77 






r iF 5 



— 5 

5 £ 



-= cm 

"5 



o 

z 

u E 

o 3 

o 5 
ct u 



>>>^>>>>> 



< < 



>>->>>->>-> 



—. -^ I s - _ „ — ' 



05 — * — a> ~— — 



(/»«»(» 



o 


CM 


T 


T- 


o 


o 


▼- 


o 


O 


o 




CM 


O 


CO 


r> 


CO 


co 


T 


■^ - 


•<r 


T 


o 


O 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 



TT T T T 



S S S 5 S2 

2 ° 5i 5> 



^ "a 



c 
a> 
E 
<u 

-B 1 « 

I ° 
O 



E E 
a. g. 

a- >> 



5 5 S 



z 


CD 


s 








CL 




> 


ro 


C 












o 


o 
t- 


in 

CO 
















CO LU 


LU 


«3 




HI CO 


CD 


5 




" 2 


£ 



2 
CD 



> > > 



O .2 



ra en P 



Q. 

5 a . 

u CO 3 

< _ — 

ro O o 

*D CD CO 



« .<2 (A 

0- CD <J 

— c co 



oo O 



C C t— — — 



CL 
Q. 
ro 


a 
a 

Q 


en 

ro 


if) 

re 


< 


_i 


0) 


a) 



E - s 

re q) 

O) Q 

2 a 

Q_ 0) 



y s E 



D 



■B < 



T3 T3 



C/3 O 



£ p £ £ 



o o 
S" .£ 



O to co 

c d:oo"" 
o x cr k £ £ 

z x r - x 



< CO 

CM CM 

E E 8 h 5 

,? ,?is2 



.3 

a 
in > 

« Hi 

a. c: 
" a. 

■— (A 



c J! m CO 



CO o 
2 Q 



(. 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



MEMORANDUM 



March 5, 1997 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 

Douglas F. Wong ^ 
Executive Director 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



SUBJECT: Authorization to award Contract 2622, "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit 
Project" 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: THAT THE COMMISSION AUTHORIZE STAFF 
TO AWARD CONTACT 2622, "PIER 48 BULKHEAD SEISMIC RETROFIT PROJECT," 
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION 

The Pier 48 bulkhead buildings incurred structural damage during the 1989 Loma Prieta 
Earthquake. On January 14, 1997, the Port Commission authorized staff to advertise for 
competitive bids for Contract 2622, "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit Project." The retrofit 
contract includes the following work: driving new steel piles to support the concrete bulkhead 
exterior walls, pouring new concrete grade beams and structural slabs, jacking-up the existing 
exterior concrete walls, repairing the cracks in the existing exterior concrete walls, installing 
new steel braced frames and plywood roof diaphragm, and abating hazardous materials. 

On February 14, 1997, eight (8) bids were received. A Summary of Bids is attached. The 
lowest responsive bidder was West Bay Builders, Inc./D. Stewart Thompson, Inc., a Joint 
Venture, at a low bid of $1,151,515. D. Stewart Thompson, Inc. is a WBE firm with 51% of 
the work. Staff has reviewed the bid documents and the Human Rights Commission has 
reviewed and agreed that the MBE/WBE subcontracting goals have been met. Staff 
recommends that the Commission authorize the award of Contract 2622 to West Bay Builders. 
Inc/D. Stewart Thompson, Inc. , a Joint Venture. It is also recommended that the Commission 
authorize a 10% contingency for possible Type I contract modifications and that the Executive 
Director be authorized to accept the work after it is complete. It is anticipated that FEMA/OES 
will fund the entire cost of this contract. 

Prepared by Cliff Jarrard, Chief Harbor Engineer 

THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM 6B 



I:\wp51\agd-p48a.cj 



) ) 

PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-19 



WHEREAS, Pier 48 bulkhead incurred structural damage during the 1989 Loma Prieta 
Earthquake; and 

WHEREAS, on January 14, 1997, the Port Commission authorized staff to advertise for 
competitive bids for Contract 2622; and 

WHEREAS, on February 14, 1997, eight (8) bids were received; and 

WHEREAS, staff has reviewed the bid documents and determined that the lowest 

responsive bidder is West Bay Builders, Inc./ D. Stewart Thompson, Inc., a 
Joint Venture; and 

WHEREAS, the Human Rights Commission has reviewed the bids and determined that 
this contractor has met the MBE/WBE subcontracting goals and that the 
contractor qualifies for the bid preference; and 

WHEREAS, it is anticipated that FEMA/OES will fund the entire cost of the seismic 
retrofit, now therefore be it 



RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby authorizes the award of 
Contract 2622, "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit Project," to West Bay 
Builders, Inc./D. Stewart Thompson, Inc., a Joint Venture at a cost of 
$1,151,515, and authorizes a 10% contingency for possible Type 1 contract 
modifications; and be it further 

RESOLVED, that the San Francisco Port Commission authorizes the Executive Director to 
accept the work after it is complete. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of March 11, 1997. 



Secretary 

I:\wp51\agd-p48a.cj 



c 



f 



5 I 



o 
o 


o 
o 


o 

p 


o 
o 


o 
o 


o 
o 


o 
o 


o 
o 


O 

o 


o 
o 


o 
P 


o 
o 


o 


§ 


s 

in 


In' 
o 

CM 


in 


o 
o 


o 
o 
to 


o 
o 
cn 


o 
o 

m" 


o 

o 

CO 


o 
o 

o 


o 
o 

p 


o 

CM 

cn 
o 

CO 


o 

CMi 
lO 
CO! 

CO! 

co 


o 
o 


cn 
ft 


CM 
CD 


CO 


CM 

cn 


cm 


CM 


r- 

CN 
5 


M" 

CO 


in 
5 








I 


! 






j 


i 






1 J 

1 [ 


^ 
*» 


1 

— 



CO CO 




v 




a) 

z: 


o 




</) 






o 


o 
o 

o 


c 

(13 

> 


< 




'c 




■ 




<r 




m 


_) 










Ll_ 








(0 


a 




^r 




Q. O 


a 


a. 


EL 


o> 


CO 


— ' 





iri o 

|r- o 



' 001 o 

SjiSii 



> 




o 


o 




5 


to 






tn 

-i 


_) 


-C 


« 


in 


— 


0) 


o 


O 


uo 


c 




<n 


U- 










*3- 




CQ 


^r 


co 


~* 





— » 
o 



» *- <- 



o 


o 


o 


'! oil o; 


c_> 


o 


o 


: o!i oil 


o 
o 


o 
o 


o 
o 


;, mil ioii 
con toil 


o 




m" 


CO CM 


CM 






IOII T"l» 


«* 


» 


» 


l>»i'0»i| 



S o 



CO 



) 

o 
o 

CO 

>-o 

(X Z 

WW 

QS 

tDi- 

tc 
o 
a. 



»;?« o 

a-2 co J op 

E <" c<, £ o«n 

■ 5 < S •= f 5 

y - « 



S cn S 



r- t- m 



> a 



£ o c 

.~ "> to 

12 o- cn 

£ E 

2 o — CM 

== .c <n r- 



CO 



to .1 — t) 

5S.t •=? 



' t0 Tj «.. _. 

s c S 'I 

M tn «2 

a £ S 



5 Ico 
£ to-j 

iij u 



- o CJl 

»o c 

to t£ 

■c to o 

(D Ol 



to to 
Jc to 

*_ 0) 



O to 
□>— O _ 

o.E£— _-SStD 



■a" 



to: 



! to 



o ° 
oi_ □ 

c-E "^ 

tc«o 

S 2 CLfO 
O.C "> - 

lo'oS 



»on to 

w r O 

*_ tz to 

If'il 

IT] o a 
5 " to o 



— to 
£■0 



S5^?«;c3c 

' S ™ Eorra.!2 "X 

WJ3- m J2 cv-Tjy 
; to to to S c to o £ — 

C=T3 to CO Q-TJ CD (o"^ 
^ CO „, CD C to— g ;„ 

g^iols^Soa 



0J -Q 



5; a. si CL 



'3 ^ 5 .2 



© © © a 
© © ffl © oi 






— o 



1 E ' 

CD a 



£S 


tl 


o 


o 


o 


i to^ 

CD j? O 
CO ™ ^ 

^ go 


"to 
c 


to 

CD 


o 


to 

o 


CD 

E 
c 








o 

F 


o 

F 


o 

F 


to^ Q. 


to 


CO 


to 




c 


■D 


•a 


T3 

to 


< O U) 


LU 












0J«- 


0) CM 


CD CO 
















£ o 


'£ o 


C O 


m 




0.Z 


Q.Z 


D.Z 



^ ^ r- ^ CD 



io ^o ^o ^o 



E 

ffi 

a> 
,> 
JB 

■o 

< 

^^ + 

CO cn 

E E 

■o "O 





to 


ffl m 


o 


O 


a 


o 


a> a> 


o 


< 


a> 


m 


co co 

a co 


s 


■D 

© 


(/} 


cn 03 


CO 




0. 


c 


•*—' ^w 


E 


-> 


To 


co to 


© 


o 


© 

E 


X 

■3 2 


3 2 
o o 


(0 

E 


© 
© 


O 


O a. 


t- i- 


T_ 










© 


< 


K 


-1. 

^ ffiO 

3°- 




CQ 


C 

o 


D.Z 

11 




© 
O 


3 



< 



L 



m d en 



) 



CQ CD 



C c n ™ 






69 *- *- 



o 
o 

c 

2 <D 

2 < o 

I? - 

CI? 

O I 5 
u o < 

N O O 

5 in 



b 
o 

ID "g £<» 



o 
o 


OH O 

mil m 




o 
o 


oiil oil- 




l^n h-i- 




o 


roi| M 






pJi iO| 




69 


311 Sli 






(Ml! (Nil 


t * 




*9 69 


o 

z 




! : 


co 



- SI 5 







u. 


T 








69 
















1 






< 




CO 
























1 












s 


o 


o 


o 


o 


O 


O 


o 


O 


o 


O 


Ol: O 










o 


o 


o 


o 


O 






o 


o 


o 


On Of 


> 








o 


o 






o 


O 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


(Oil (CI. 








o 


o 






o 


o 


o 


LO 


o 


o 


o 




in 

CM 








o 


o 


en 

CO~ 


cm" 


o 
o" 


O) 
CN 


co" 


o 

CN 


o 
o" 


CN 












CO 




en 


r~ 


r— 




CO 


CM 


CN 


Ol 


CO 


(9 






«*9 
o 


69 


O) 

69 


69 


69 


69 


69 


69 


69 


69 


69 




CO 


in 

to 
o 
r 1 


a) 






H 






















r"l 


T"! 


CO 
























1 


H 


v» 


c 






























































i! -i 


ro 


O 




























1 


i| 


o 










o 


o 




a 


o 


o 


O 


o 


o 


h 


o 






rt 


O 




o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


o 


p 


o 




o 


2 




01 


o 


o 




m 


ro 


LO 


CO 


m 


■fl- 


o 


o 




U 






•c»- 


o 






CO 


CM 


CO 


CM 


69 


■a- 


o 








(D 


1^ 


o 


o 


OT 


69 


69 


69 


69 




69 


CO 




c 


03 


<r 


CD 

in 


*- 


r~ 


CM 


co 














f» 




c 

0) 


b 
o 


<_> 


c 

3 


°-s 


69 


ID 

en 

69 


» 














1 







in W — 



69 «- t- 



"• 5 



§ 2 5 ,. 

E - co 00 



©<o 

_ ii<N 

a ^69 



) 



2 2 co S 



O 
O 
(0 

>:" 

I* 

3 < 
(0 w 



t- 69 69 






ffl 



o 

Q. 



CO 

O) o 

c m 

W a, CD 

* ! a § 2 

c b » A — 

I 2 " 1 1 

Is £§ = 



8» 

cm 



t- t- CN 



1* 

fc n_i 



ECD 



- O O) 
™ O C 

co i=iz 
— co o 
£jSra 
ra-fe Q. 

o^ 
oi_ o 

SSI'S Q.C0 
Q.C 2 - 

o "-™ 2 



^_ © CO d 

O <n -o w ^ 

i-CCO So CO 

; w" a.B c ^ ra S o 
»■□ ™ » a m ci 

^racIrOC 



d° c 



) 



«£ ra<o 

J (Orfl) 

• oS 

-Q;rfe 

»S o 

^_ c 0) 

o Err 
— 5~ "> 
c^ 3 co 

t.£ c o 

IDTJo a 

2-n^E 
5 y co o 
<■Eo.il 




So 
Z o 
OE 

— CO 

03"° 
» I 

CO c 

< o 



= i/> g^co-o t: c0(j 

C-O CO CO 0--^ qj w -^ 

■;; ra'OT3- D co > s o 
3ococoy»co>" 



- o 



1 E - 

CO o 



0] 

o 

4* 

oc 

II 

IT ™ 
u ro 
Eo 

CO r: 

13 i2 3 

ra o S 

.cP O 

* ™^ ■= 

3 N-i CO 

co <5 o c 

CD'S,* g 

£ "a E 

C0"O o. o 

0.%-a ; 
= xl c 
< cow oj 



o 5 



E 




a> 




*^ 








■o 




m 


*" 






s 


z 


> 


E 


4-* 


CO 






■o 




■D 


o 


< 


0. 


^ + 


c 


(0 w 


3 



O) 



^ CO ^ 



BBSS CD l. 



tS -s do 



tU MJ UJ ii» - 



r- -r- T- — CO 



E E 



CQ CQ 






a> 


Q) 


en 


to 


CO 


CO 


CQ 


CQ 






(A 


00 


2 3 


o 


O 


r- 


r- 



■= ■= So 



oj*- ©cm coco Qj^r ©in ^to er 

'C o c O c o c o c o c o „. m ■»- 
D.ZD.ZD.ZD.ZCLZCLZ |- 

lE|E|ESE5Ef Si.52 



— m a 
o o _ 
z z ^ 



(, 



( 



| 

CO 



f 



03 CD * 

8 • „ 

|SS s g> 

£ sz re re 



ft O 



O 
O 

00 

>o 

<2 
s£ 

s 2 

3 < 

WOT 

0D,_ 

or 
o 

a. 



o £ 



II 



A) CM 



y re 







\ 












. 


z 



z 


> j i I I" i 

: j i 

i I I 

I ! ' i j 
! i 
ill 










j 
I 

;; 

i 
I 

H 
i 


Pacific Constructioi 
928A Van Ness Av 
S.F.CA 94109 
(415)567-1712 


> 


: i 

>-■>■>- >- > >->'>- , i>-'^|^|>-|>-|>- 

1 I 


>- 


>j> 


> 




Z 



z 


! 

; i ; ! ! 
1 1 ' 

1 

i ! 

< ! , 

j ; 








I 


! 
|| 

! 
i 


Bames/LTM 
449 10th St. 
S.F..CA 94103 
(415)552-7070 


> 

Ifi 

a> 

>- 


! ] 

i ; 

i 


| 

! 


w 

<o 

15 '•} 

ZcOl 

0) 

(O 

z i! 


r- W 


Z 



z 


j i 1 


i 

1 i 

! 


i! 


Trico Constructioi 
445C Hampshire 
S.F., CA94110 
(415) 552-8439 


> 

tfl 

> 


>>>>->>■>->- >zz>"> >■ ■> > >'<>' 


Nil 
1) 

"Sli 
Zj 

«j 
a> 

(01 ] 

Zj! 


5/ 

>son Inc., JV 

an Rafael, CA 94123 


z 



z 




>•■ 


West Bay Builder 
D. Stewart Thomf 
615LindaroSt., £ 
(415)456-8972 


>- 


>■>■>->->>•>->->-££>>>>>>>- 




» 

c 
a> 
E 



D 

to 

E 


U- 

■0 
a> 

'5 
cr 
a> 
a: 


ojtj-^-oot- *- cm co v 
oo^-cmcoco & a> & &> & 
CO coco^^j-^-tj- * « If <t » 
000000 00000 
000000 00000 


c*- 
Z 
? 
O 

a 

X 

00 

c 
o> 

c 

LU 



> 

'(A 
C 
O 

a. 
in 
a> 

a: 

T3 
1) 

E 
a> 
a> 

O 




'Bid 

Addenda Acknowledgement 
Schedule of Bid Prices 
Schedule of Unit Prices 

Bid Bond 
Experience & Financial Qualifications 
List of Subcontractors 
Non-Collusion Certification 
HRC Form 1 

HRC Schedule A (as applic, by 5pm) 
HRC Schedule L (as applic, by 5pm) 
HRC Form 2A 
HRC Form 2B 
Apprenticeship Program 
Business Tax Reg Declaration 
Highest General Prevailing Wage 
Equal Opp EmpI & Bus Practices: LD 
MacBride Principles 



I 



u> 5SSS 






^ ^ ~= <? 



^ ^ 




o> 


01 






0) 
J3 


1 


fc 


3 


F 






b 


V 


u 


a> 


u 




fc 


E 


ii 






< 



( 









s 






Segura/ 

RL 
97 


o 

c 

6 
o 


Z 

o 

Z 


c "> 


M 




a> ■■■". 


< 




CO T 


•9 





CD CO * 

£ • ^ 

|| a & 

£ x: m ra 

Q. O Q 0- 



.M O 



J_ o 

a t 

< 
O 



* S u. = 

< <- co ~ 



in 

cm 

3 55 

1 1 
ra <-> 

II 

O <D 

O 5 

f 1 

> * 



™ 1^ 



i ! i 



n 



i !l 



U> CM 

cmi i>^ 



>-!>-|>-i>-i>-|>-!>-i>-j>-|^{^!>-i>-!>--j>-i>-i>-i>-i| 



2 E 



* 5 






c 





Q. 


(0 


O 


>-o 


•O 

CO 


K z 


<5 


sfr 




2 7 




3< 




(0 co 




Qfe 




= O 




0D,_ 




K 




O 




0- 





T5 <B cm 



o o 



u. r !2 



o o 
<» Z 

0) o 

£2 



IT) 
< 

a" § 

o " 

ra 51 

c °° 

co S 



4= a 



a) cm 
x: <° 
£ CM 



) 



CL u 



> >■>■>■>'>• > >•> 



< < 



>->- >-!>!>!>- >ii 



>->->>->>>->-> 



< < 



>>->->- >-■>■ >• zcm 5 e 






CM •» «- O O «- 
O O t- CM CO CO 
CO CO TT Tf ■>» ■* 
OOOOOO 
OOOOOO 



■«■ T ■» "T ■* 
OOOOO 
OOOOO 



J2 ¥ m in 



in o 





<D 


0) 







* 




±- 







n 








■0 


'E 






< 


m 


J 










m 













<[> 


(i) 












■o 
■a 
< 


-j 












■0 





x: 



aj 




co 


CO 



§ IE 

ra u> w 

a S* >» 

j= XI XI 

3 c £ .a" 

O .2 o. q. 

— IK Q- Q. 

.a v> 3 « <° 

a * s 2 « 



O) d> 

c 5 .y 

.2 5 5 
ra en 2 

!= S 0- 



C o>o. 

g ** 

I CO ra 
00 



c » = 

m o ra "" 

2 a) > =j 

aO 11 (0 



u. 

"O 0) 

5 ° T => 

o c ^ = 

CO 0) CO o 

. 5 S o 9 

x: x: cq Q. — c 



< 



O) Q. =0 ^ 



00^33 



■^ -^ < CO 



_ — CL 



o 



aj a> £ E 



11 ° ° ° 
"- co w u. 

"000 

% cc cc cc 

1 I I X 



Li c m o) w 
"- n> — At — - 



ra a. 
fe E - 

— O "o 



> w 

■- UJ 

=5 o 

■o z 

< UJ 

■*■ Ul 

0) u. 



UJ UJ ol 



o 

0- _ 

I < 



<" c 



41B 

.2> o- ™ 

IiilS 



en 






J3 


u 


1 


fc 


S 


F 






b 


a> 


V 


<» 


<u 




t 


E 


■D 



Q Q 



»- CM 
1) 0) 



i 






I 



> 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



MEMORANDUM 



March 11,1997 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 
Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 



FROM: 



Douglas F. Wong -i 
Executive Director 1 ' 



SUBJECT: Port Acquisition of Caltrans Parcel for New Ball Park 
DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE RESOLUTION 



This proposed transaction would provide for the purchase by the City, through the 
Port; from the State of California, Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") of a parcel 
bounded by King, Berry, 2nd and 3rd Streets and described generally as Assessor's Block 
3794. The parcel, which adjoins Port property known as Pier 46 and Seawall Lots 335 
and 336 and certain City streets, is part of the proposed ballpark site at China Basin. The 
property consists of approximately 155,279 square feet (about 3.6 acres) of land area, or 
about 28% of the ballpark project site. 

Section 2.6 of Chapter 1333 of the Statues of 1968 (the "Burton Act"), which was 
added by Chapter 11, Statutes of 1984 of the California Legislature (AB 84), gives the 
City, acting by and through its Port, the right to negotiate directly with Caltrans for the 
purchase of the property. In 1991, the City acquired a portion of the block fronting King 
Street from the State, at no cost pursuant to a separate piece of State legislation (Streets & 
Highways Code Section 580.2), for the King Street improvement project. 

The proposed purchase by the City remains subject to completion of the 
environmental impact report for the ballpark project and the approval of the Port 
Commission, Board of Supervisors and Mayor, in their discretion, based on the 
information generated by the environmental review. On January 29, 1997 the California 

THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 7A 



K 



« 






1 



March 5, 1997 
Page 2 



Transportation Commission ("CTC"), which has authority on dispositions of Caltrans 
property, approved an agreement in principle on the basic terms of the purchase of 
Caltrans parcel by the City. The terms of purchase are in accord with the Term Sheet for 
the ballpark lease presented to the Port Commission and Board of supervisor in December 
of 1996. The main terms of the proposed purchase and sale, which remain subject to Port 
Commission and Board of Supervisors approval, are as follows: 

• The purchase price for the property will be $3,600,000. The City would purchase 
the property with funds obtained through a financing to be arranged by the Port. 
The terms of that financing would, of course, be subject to Port commission and 
Board of Supervisors approval. The Port would have jurisdiction over the 
property. The fair market value rent in the term sheet for the ballpark lease was 
premised on the Port's purchase of the Caltrans property, with its funds. 

A $100,000 deposit is required of the City by March 31, 1997. The deposit is 
nonrefundable unless the transaction does not close due to Caltrans' failure to 
perform. If the transaction closes, the deposit is applied to the purchase price. The 
Port will pay the required deposit. 

• the close of escrow must occur before December 31, 1997. If the City proposes to 
close the transaction at a latter date, Caltrans reserves the right to renegotiate the 
price. It is anticipated that the closing would occur in July, 1997 in order to meet 
the proposed ballpark schedule. 

• Once the transaction has closed, the City will be obligated, subject to certain 
exceptions, to indemnify Caltrans for any claims arising out of the presence or 
release of hazardous materials. The hazardous materials indemnity will terminate 
20 years after the closing with respect to claims made against Caltrans by third 
parties. The City will also require the Giants entity which will develop the 
ballpark, China Basin Ballpark Company ("CBBC"), to provide a similar 
hazardous materials indemnity to the City under the final ground lease agreement. 
After carefully considering the results of hazardous materials studies of the site, the 
City's expert environmental staff believe that the proposed indemnity is 
commercially reasonable. The purchase price reflects an adjustment for the 
hazardous materials indemnity Caltrans is requiring as a condition of the sale. 

• The City will purchase the property in its "as is" condition. The property is 
improved with seven warehouse buildings that have significant deferred 
maintenance and are nearing the end of their economic lives. There is a total of 
approximately 30 occupants, including subtenants, all under month-to-month 
leases. The purchase price reflects an adjustment for these conditions. 



( 



n ,. 



.;• )]<'■'■■ 



March 5, 1997 
Page 3 



• CBBC believes that it may be necessary to begin the process of terminating the 
leases before the close of escrow in order to meet the construction schedule for the 
new ballpark. Accordingly, the agreement provides that before the close of escrow 
Cal trans, at the request of CBBC, will take actions required to terminate private 
tenancies of the property, but only if CBBC provides an indemnity to Caltrans for 
any costs arising out of such terminations. The City would not be a party to the 
indemnity and would not have any liability for the costs of terminating the leases 
unless and until the City actually purchases the property. CBBC would be 
responsible for paying any costs of terminating the leases and relocating tenants 
incurred at any time before escrow for the purchase of the Caltrans parcel closes. 

• Upon the close of escrow the City will assume responsibility for terminating the 
leases of the tenants and providing any relocation assistance and benefits. Once the 
City acquires title to the property,, the City will indemnify Caltrans for any claims 
for relocation assistance sadc by the tenants and for other claims by tenants arising 
out of lease terminations done after the closing by the city or before the closing 
with the City's consent. By the terms of a separate proposed agreement between 
the City and CBBC, the City's responsibility for terminating the leases and 
providing relocation assistance will be limited to a total of $500,000. Any 
allowable amount in excess of $500,000 must be paid by CBBC. The City's 
obligations for the purchase of the property and the relocation of the tenants will 
not exceed $4,100,000, as provided in the term sheet between the City and CBBC, 
which was presented to the Port Commission and the Board of Supervisors in 
December of 1996. 

• The City Caltrans, and CBBC will enter into a non-binding term sheet containing 
the essential terms of the purchase and sale outlined in this memorandum. Within 
60 days after executing the term sheet, the City and Caltrans will attempt to enter 
into a Sales Agreement, provided that the City will have no obligation under such 
agreement to purchase of the property or proceed with the transaction unless and 
until environmental review required under the CEQA has been completed and the 
Port commission and Board of Supervisors have approved the acquisition. The 
final Sales Agreement, and the City's option to acquire the property on the terms 
summarized in this memorandum, will be brought to the Port Commission and the 
Board of Supervisors for approval. It is anticipated that the final agreement will be 
presented for approval, together with the other agreements and actions required for 
the project, in June or July of this year. 

The State's approval of the agreement in principle for the purchase of the Caltrans 
parcel is a major step toward the attainment of the ballpark project consistent with the 
proposal outlined in the December 1996 term sheet. 

Prepared by: Douglas Wong, Executor Director 



I 



< 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 97-23 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



) 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



) 



Section B 3.581 of the City Charter empowers the Port Commission of 
San Francisco (the Commission") with power and duty to use, conduct, 
operate, maintain, manage, regulate and control the Port area of San 
Francisco; and 

in March of 1996, the voters of the City and County of San Francisco 
approved Proposition B which authorized a proposed development on Port 
property for a new ballpark on approximately 12.5 acres site in China 
Basin; and 

Section 2.6 of Chapter 1333 of the Statues of 1968 (the "Burton Act"), 
which was added by Chapter 11, Statutes of 1984 of the California 
Legislature (AB 84), gives the City, acting by and through its Port, the 
right to negotiate directly with Caltrans for the purchase of the property; 
and 

this proposed transaction would provide for the purchase by the City 
from the State of California, Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") 
of a parcel bounded by King, Berry, 2nd and 3rd Streets and described 
generally as Assessor's Block 3794. The parcel, which adjoins Port 
property known as Pier 46 and Seawall Lots 335 and 336 and certain 
City streets, is part of the proposed ballpark site at China Basin. The 
property consists of approximately 155,279 square feet (about 3.6 acres) 
of land area, or about 28% of the ballpark site; and 

on January 29, 1997, the California Transportation Commission (CTC), 
which has authority on dispositions of Caltrans property, approved an 
agreement in principle on the basic terms of the purchase of the Caltrans 
parcel necessary for the City's assembly of the site for the ballpark at 
China Basin; and 

the City, Caltrans, and CBBC will enter into a non-binding term sheet 
containing the essential terms of the purchase and sale set forth in the 
memorandum to the Commission for Agenda Item 7A for their March 
11, 1997 meeting; and 



) 



Resolution No. 97-23 
Page 2 



WHEREAS, 



the purchase price for the property will be $3,600,000. The City will 
purchase the property with funds obtained through a financing to be 
arranged by the Port. The terms of that financing will subject to 
Commission and Board of Supervisors approval following appropriate 
environmental review. The Port will have jurisdiction over the property; 
and 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



> 



RESOLVED, 



RESOLVED, 



a $100,000 deposit is required by CTC from the City by March 31, 
1997. The deposit is nonrefundable unless the transaction does not close 
due to Caltrans' failure to perform. If the transaction closes, the deposit 
will be applied to the purchase price. The Port will pay the required 
deposit; and 

within 60 days after executing the non-binding agreement the City and 
Caltrans will attempt to enter into a Sales Agreements, provided that the 
City will have no obligation under any such agreement to purchase the 
property or proceed with the transaction unless and until environmental 
review required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 
has been completed as well as public review and hearings required by 
law and the Commission and Board of Supervisors have approved the 
acquisition; now, therefore be it 

the Commission hereby authorizes and directs the Executive Director to 
pay the required $100,000 non-refundable deposit for the acquisition for 
the Caltrans parcel; and, be it further 

that the Commission hereby endorses the execution of a non-binding 
agreement set forth in the Memorandum to the Commission for Agenda 
Item 7A for their March 11, 1997 meeting, a copy of which is on file with 
the Secretary of the Commission. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of March 11, 1997. 



Secretary 



) 



I 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




Ferry Building 
San Francisco, CA 94111 
Telephone 415 274 0400 
MEMORANDUM Telex 275940 PSFUR 

Fax 415 274 0528 
Cable SFPORTCOMM 
Writer 

March 5, 1997 

TO: MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 

FROM: Douglas F. Wong A ) 
Executive Director- :/ 

SUBJECT: Approval of Port staff representative to attend the American Industrial 
Hygiene Conference and Exposition in Dallas, Texas 



On May 19-23, 1997, the Annual National Industrial Hygiene conference will take 
place in Dallas, Texas. The program will address a number of issues important to 
the environmental, health and safety programs at the Port. The issues include 
technical and regulatory updates, and enhancement of environmental, safety and 
health management. 

Attendance at this conference by a representative of the Port's Environmental and 
Safety Section will enhance the quality of our environmental, health and safety 
programs. Port Commission approval is therefore sought for the Port's Industrial 
Hygienist to attend to this conference and represent the Port of San Francisco. 
This request is in accordance with the Port's Fiscal Year 1996/97 budget. 



Prepared by: Alex Lee 

Director, Facilities & Operations 



THIS ITEM COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 2A 



4 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-21 



WHEREAS, 



the Executive Director is requesting authorization for one Port 
representative to travel to Dallas, Texas, for the American 
Industrial Hygiene Conference and Exposition to be held on 
May 19-23, 1997; and 



WHEREAS, 



attendance at this seminar will enhance the environmental, 
health and safety programs at the Port; and 



WHEREAS, 



the cost of this trip is included in the Port Commission's Fiscal 
Year 1996-97 budget; now, therefore, be it 



RESOLVED, that the Port Commission hereby approves this travel request. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission 
at its meeting of March 11, 1997. 



Secretary 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



March 11, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 

Douglas F. Wong >J*li 
Executive Director 



SUBJECT: Travel authorization for the Director of Finance and Administration to 

attend an American Association of Port Authorities Port Administration and 
Information Technology Seminar on April 23-25, 1997 in Secaucus, New 
Jersey 

The Director of Finance and Administration requests approval to travel to Secaucus, New 
Jersey to attend an American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) sponsored Port 
Administration and Information Technology Seminar, which will be held April 23-25, 
1997. 

The seminar will cover several topics of interest to the Port of San Francisco, including 
trends in information technology and office automation, PC based applications for Ports 
and disaster recovery and business resumption. 

The estimate costs of this trip are: 



Registration 


$ 


395.00 


Air Fare 


$ 


500.00 


Hotel 


$ 


450.00 


Ground Transportation 


$ 


40.00 


Meals 


$ 


100.00 


Other 


$ 


50.00 


TOTAL 


$1 


,535.00 



Prepared by: Benjamin A. Kutnick 

Director of Finance & Administration 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 2B 



4 



« 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-22 



WHEREAS, 



staff is requesting authorization for the Director of Finance and 
Administration to travel to Secaucus, New Jersey, to attend an 
American Association of Port Authorities sponsored Port 
Administration and Information Technology Seminar, which will be 
held April 23-25, 1997; and 



WHEREAS, 



the estimated cost of this trip is included in the Port Commission 
budget; and, therefore, be it 



RESOLVED, 



that the Port Commission hereby approves this travel request. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of March 11, 1997. 



Secretary 



< 






PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




Ferry Building 

MEMORANDUM fan F : anci ^- ^!*J" 

Telephone 415 274 0400 
Telex 275940 PSF UR 
, c ,nm Fax 415 274 0528 

March 5, 1997 cable sfportcomm 

Writer 



TO: MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James R. Herman 



FROM: Douglas F. Wong ^j 

Executive Director^ 

SUBJECT: Approval of Lease No. L-12419 with S&C Ford of San Francisco at Pier 50, 
Shed C (Terry Francois Boulevard and Mission Rock Street). 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE LEASE WITH S&C FORD OF SAN 
FRANCISCO 

BACK GROUND 

S&C Ford of San Francisco approached the Port with a request to lease 66,000 square feet of 
shed space in Shed C at Pier 50 to receive, store, prepare, clean and deliver new automobiles, 
vans, and trucks. The shed space would be modified at the tenant's expense to accommodate 
the proposed use. A water retention basin would be installed to prevent runoff of wash water 
into the Bay. Demising would be provided by the tenant. 

Shed C at Pier 50 has been vacant since the termination by Western Rim of its lease in 1995. 
Since then the Shed C facility has been used intermittently for film industry storage, set 
construction and film shoots. The Shed has been vacant for over four months. S&C Ford will 
occupy 66,000 square feet of this 90,000 square foot facility. Port staff proposes to lease the 
balance of the shed to Westar Marine Services, a tug, barge and water taxi operator, Royal 
Charter Marine a maritime chandlery, and American Airporter, three Port tenants that will be 
displaced by the Ballpark project. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 9£ 



Agenda Item No. 9C 

Page 2 



Proposed Lease 

A lease (Port Lease No. L- 124 19) has been negotiated with S&C Ford by the Port Real Estate 
and Asset Management staff on the following terms and conditions: 



66,000 square feet of space in Shed C at Pier 50; 
Four (4) years commencing on April 15, 1997; 
$19,800 per calendar month ($.30 per square foot) 



The Port Commission approved minimum rental rate parameter for open shed space 
over 10,000 square feet in the Southern Waterfront is $.30 per square foot. In addition 
to the shed space, S&C Ford will have access to and control over the fenced yard area 
immediately adjacent to the Shed C premises; 

Rent Commencement Date : June 15, 1997. This will allow two months for S&C Ford 

to complete its tenant improvements build-out prior to rent 
commencement; 



1. 


Premises 


2. 


Term: 


3. 


Rent: 



5. Security Deposit: 



6. Tenant Improvements: 



7. Maintenance: 



The proposed lease waives the Port's standard security 
deposit requirement, so long as the tenant is not in default 
of the payment of rent. Any failure to pay any rents 
within 15 days of the due date will result in a requirement 
that the tenant deliver the standard Security Deposit to the 
Port automatically and without notice. The security 
deposit would be $39,600.00; 

S&C Ford will be responsible for all demising inside the 
Shed C premises and construction of all improvements 
required by S&C Ford as a result of its use of the 
premises. The Port will restore the restrooms to operating 
condition, deliver the premises in broom clean condition, 
replace any defective lighting, relocate a fence and gate on 
the premises exterior and redirect outside lighting. 

The Port will agree to maintain the roof and exterior 
walls. All other items of repair and maintenance rest with 
S&C Ford. 



Prepared by: V. Fei Tsen, Director, Real Estate & Asset Management 



. 






PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 



RESOLUTION NO. 97-20 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 






RESOLVED, 



Charter Section B3.581 empowers the Port Commission with the power 
and duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and 
control the Port area of San Francisco; and 

under Charter Section B3.581 leases granted or made by the Port 
Commission shall be administered exclusively by the operating forces of 
the Port Commission; and 

S&C Ford of San Francisco proposes to lease 66,000 square feet of shed 
space at Pier 50 Shed C to operate a new car, van and truck storage and 
dealer preparation facility; and 

staff has negotiated all the terms and conditions of a proposed lease with 
S&C Ford of San Francisco on the terms and conditions outlined in the 
Memorandum to the Port Commission for Agenda Item 9C for the Port 
Commission meeting of March 11, 1997; now therefore, be it 

that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby approves entering into 
Lease No. L- 124 19 between the Port and S&C Ford of San Francisco on 
the terms and conditions outlined in the Memorandum to the Port 
Commission for Agenda Item 9C for their March 11, 1997 meeting, and 
authorizes the Executive Director of the Port, or his designee, to execute 
the same on behalf of the Port, in such form as is approved by the City 
Attorney. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of March 11, 1997. 



Secretary 






I:\WP51\S&CFORD.MEM\ND\jeAFebruary 19, 1997 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING D0CUMENTS DEPT * 
MARCH 11, 1997 0CT Q g jss9 

SAN FRANCISCO 

1. ROLL CALL PUBLIC LIBRARY 

The meeting was called to order by Commission President Michael Hardeman at 4:00 
p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Michael Hardeman, Denise McCarthy, 
Frankie Lee, Preston Cook and James Herman. 

Commissioner Hardeman stated that Port employees requested a special Public Comment 
period to present the Executive Director a letter of petition and support. For the record, 
Commissioner Hardeman read the Letter of Petition, signed by 170 Port employees. 

Mr. Gene Sheets, Port Electrician, stated that the 170 employees who signed the letter of 
petition represent 80 percent of the Port's personnel. He stated that staff appreciates the 
effort and the support the Executive Director has given the maritime industry and the 
maintenance department. He emphasized that staff is behind him 100 percent. 

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - February 25, 1997 Special Meeting & Regular Meeting 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the minutes of the Special 
and Regular meetings were adopted. 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Executive Director's Report: 

• Mr. Wong indicated that he is overwhelmed with the letter of support presented by 
staff and thanked them and the Commission for their support. 

• He reported that the Port and BCDC see the Concept Agreement as a major milestone 
toward better relations and clear, coordinated policies and rules for the waterfront 
projects. Both Commission supported further staff reports to develop more details to 
produce amendments to be approved in the final Waterfront Plan and Urban Design 
guidelines and BCDC planning documents. 

He has directed staff to work with the historic preservation community, Planning 
Department staff, and the public to further analyze the pier removal proposal and seek 
modifications or alternative proposals which would meet the expressed concerns 
regarding Pier 33. He commended not only Port staff but BCDC's for working 
together in bringing forth the Concept Agreement. 

M031197.igq "1" 



• The Port will be flying Union Jacks from the Ferry Building, for 100 days, as a 
tribute to Britain Meets the Bay which will be 100 events from March 23, through 
June 23, 1997. 

4. MARITIME 

5. REAL ESTATE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

A. Authorization to award Contract 2631. "Fisherman's Wharf Lighting Improvements. 
Phase 1." (Resolution No. 97-24) 

Mr. Alex Lee, Director of Facilities & Operations, indicated that the Commission 
approved the conceptual design of this project and gave staff approval to advertise for 
bids for the construction of these improvements. 

Six bids were received on February 21, 1997. The lowest bidder, K.P. Lam 
Construction, submitted a request to withdraw its bid of $218,000 and bid bond. The 
bidder alleged that one of its subcontractors failed to fully estimate the work. The 
next adjusted low bidder is Millard Tong Construction, a certified MBE firm. Staff 
reviewed the bid documents and HRC reviewed and agreed that the MBE/WBE 
subcontracting goals have been met by Millard Tong Construction. Staff recommends 
that the Commission approve the withdrawal of the K.P. Lam Construction bid, 
approve the award of Contract 263 1 to Millard Tong Construction and authorize a 
10% contingency for possible Type I modifications and authorize the Executive 
Director to accept the work upon completion. 

Commissioner Cook inquired about the variance in bid prices among the bidders. Mr. 
Lee replied that each bidder had a pre-bid conference with Port staff and were 
provided the same information. Commissioner Cook inquired if staff is confident that 
the low bidder will be able to produce a good quality work. Commissioner Lee also 
observed that there is a big difference in the bids between the first three lowest 
bidders and the last three. He wanted to ensure that the contractor did not make a 
mistake and realize later that it cannot finish the job because of lack of money. Mr. 
Cliff Jarrard, Chief Harbor Engineer, stated that the engineer's estimate was closer to 
the first three lowest bidders. The bids were reviewed by staff and are extremely 
confident that Millard Tong Construction will do an excellent job. 

ACTION: Commissioner Lee moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy seconded 
the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

B. Authorization to award Contract 2622. "Pier 48 Bulkhead Seismic Retrofit Project." 
(Resolution No. 97-19) 

Mr. Alex Lee, Director of Facilities & Operations, indicated that the Pier 48 bulkhead 

M031197.igq "2- 



buildings incurred structural damage during the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. On 
January 14, 1997, the Port Commission authorized staff to advertise for bids. The 
retrofit contract includes the following work: driving new steel piles to support the 
concrete bulkhead exterior walls, pouring new concrete grade beams and structural 
slabs, jacking-up the existing exterior concrete walls, repairing the cracks in the 
existing exterior concrete walls, installing new steel braced frames and plywood roof 
diaphragm, and abating hazardous materials. 

Eight bids were received on February 14, 1997. The lowest responsive bidder was 
West Bay Builders, Inc./D. Stewart Thompson, Inc., a joint venture, at a bid of 
$1,151,515. D.Stewart Thompson, Inc. is a WBE firm with 51% of the work. Staff 
reviewed the bid documents and HRC reviewed and agreed that the MBE/WBE 
subcontracting goals have been met. Staff recommends that the Commission authorize 
the award of Contract 2622 to West Bay Builders, Inc. /D.Stewart Thompson, Inc., a 
joint venture. Staff also recommends that the Commission authorize a 10% 
contingency for possible Type I contract modifications and that the Executive Director 
be authorized to accept the work upon completion. It is anticipated that FEMA/OES 
will fund the entire cost of this contract. 

Commissioner Cook inquired if consideration is given to San Francisco firms. Mr. 
Lee replied that there is a percentage adjustment in the bid for local firms. 

ACTION: Commissioner Lee moved approval; Commissioner Cook seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. Approval of payment to the State of California. Department of Transportation, for 
acquisition of the Caltrans property bounded by King. Berry. 2nd and 3rd Streets and 
described generally as Assessor's Block 3794 for the new ballpark at China Basin and 
endorsement of the execution of a non-binding agreement between the City and 
CalTrans. (Resolution No. 97-23) 

Mr. Paul Osmundson, Director of Planning and Development, indicated that this 
proposed transaction would provide for the purchase by the City, through the Port, 
from the State of California, Department of Transportation ("Caltrans") of a parcel 
bounded by King, Berry, 2nd and 3rd Streets and described generally as Assessor's 
Block 3794. The parcel which adjoins Port property known as Pier 46 and Seawall 
Lots 335 and 336 and certain City streets, is part of the proposed ballpark site at 
China Basin. The property consists of approximately 155,279 square feet (about 3.6 
acres) of land area, or about 28% of the ballpark project site. 

Section 2.6 of Chapter 1333 of the Statues of 1968 (the "Burton Act") which was 
added by Chapter 11, Statutes of 1984 of the California Legislature (AB 84), gives the 
City, acting by and through its Port, the right to negotiate directly with Caltrans for 
the purchase of the property. In 1991, the City acquired a portion of the block 

M031197.igq "3" 



fronting King Street from the State, at no cost pursuant to a separate piece of State 
legislation (Streets and Highways Code Section 580.2) for the King Street 
improvement project. 

The proposed purchase by the City remains subject to completion of the 
environmental impact report for the ballpark project and the approval of the Port 
Commission, Board of Supervisors and the Mayor, in their discretion, based on the 
information generated by the environmental review. On January 29, 1997, the 
California Transportation Commission ("CTC") approved an agreement in principle 
on the basic terms of the purchase of Caltrans parcel by the City. The terms of 
purchase are in accord with the Term Sheet for the ballpark lease presented to the Port 
Commission and Board of Supervisors in December 1996. 

The main terms of the proposed purchase and sale, which remain subject to Port 
Commission and Board of Supervisors approval, are as follows: 

• The purchase price for the property will be $3.6 million. The City would 
purchase the property with funds obtained through a financing to be arranged by 
the Port. 

• A $100,000 deposit is required of the City by March 31, 1997. The deposit is 
nonrefundable unless the transaction does not close due to Caltrans' failure to 
perform. If the transaction closes, the deposit is applied to the purchase price; 
the Port will pay the required deposit. 

• The close of escrow must occur before December 31, 1997. If the City proposes 
to close the transaction at a latter date, Caltrans reserves the right to renegotiate 
the price. 

• Once the transaction has closed, the City will be obligated to indemnify Caltrans 
for any claims arising out of the presence or release of hazardous materials. The 
hazardous materials indemnity will terminate 20 years after the closing with 
respect to claims made against Caltrans by third parties. 

• The City will purchase the property in its "as is" condition. The property is 
improved with seven warehouse buildings that have significant deferred 
maintenance and are nearing the end of their economic lives. 

• China Basin Ballpark Company (CBBC) believes that it may be necessary to 
begin the process of terminating the leases before the close of escrow in order to 
meet the construction schedule for the new ballpark. Accordingly, the agreement 
provides that before the close of escrow, Caltrans will take actions required to 
terminate private tenancies of the property, but only if CBBC provides an 
indemnity to Caltrans for any costs arising out of such terminations. 

• Upon the close of escrow, the City will assume responsibility for terminating the 
leases of the tenants and providing any relocation assistance and benefits. Once 



M031197.igq 



the City acquires title to the property, the City will indemnify Caltrans for any 
claims for relocation assistance made by the tenants and for other claims by 
tenants arising out of lease terminations done after the closing by the City or 
before the closing with the City's consent. 

• The City, Caltrans, and CBBC will enter into a non-binding term sheet containing 
the essential terms of the purchase and sale outlined in this memorandum. Within 
60 days after executing the term sheet, the City and Caltrans will attempt to enter 
into a Sales Agreement, provided that the City will have no obligation under such 
agreement to purchase the property or proceed with the transaction unless and 
until environmental review required under the CEQA has been completed and the 
Port Commission and Board of Supervisors have approved the acquisition. It is 
anticipated that the final agreement will be presented for approval, together with 
the other agreements and actions required for the project, in June or July of this 
year. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

8. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 

9. CONSENT CALENDAR 

A. Approval of Port staff representative to attend the American Industrial Hygiene 
Conference and Exposition in Dallas. Texas. (Resolution No. 97-2 1) 

B. Approval for the Director of Finance and Administration to attend an American 
Association of Port Authorities Port Administration and Information Technology 
Seminar in Secaucus. New Jersey, on April 23-25. 1997. (Resolution No. 97-22) 

C. Approval of lease with S&C Ford of San Francisco for 66.000 sq. ft. of shed space at 
Pier 50. Shed "C" (Mission Rock Street at Terry Francois Blvd.) (Resolution No. 
97-20) 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy 

seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the items 
on the consent calendar were adopted. 

10. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

Ms. Sonia Laracuente, Local 87 Union Representative, indicated that seven janitors who 
works in the Ferry Building are in danger of losing their jobs. The union has approached 
Mayor Brown's aide and Mr. Ed Lee, City Purchaser, regarding this situation. The 
lowest responsible bidder is GMG. The union has presented evidence that GMG has had 
National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) charges against them for unfair treatment of 
workers. They feel that GMG is not a responsible bidder. She requested that the janitors 

M031197.igq _5 ' 



not be displaced and the Ferry Building continue to use union workers. 

Commissioner Herman indicated that this practice is becoming more prevalent. The 
Purchasing Department has seized control of these duties where for many years it's been 
within the purview of the Port. The seizure by the Purchasing Department is arbitrary, 
capricious and has the effect of punishing workers. This situation begs for a resolution that 
has equity associated with it. This Commission has been and continuous to be berated by 
a fish company at Pier 45. The workers at Pier 45 elect to implement their rights under 
the National Labor Relations Act and ask for certification as union workers. We now have 
a reversed situation. It seems that, without absolute regularity, these contracts expire that 
this particular department seizes control of all things having to do with the work of the 
janitors. He completely supports and hopes that the full Commission would support 
maintenance of pay and negotiated settlements be upward. The same conduct should be 
extended to the janitors employed at the Port. He suggested that staff and the Commission 
communicate with the Mayor and his staff and the Purchasing Department to express its 
displeasure with the way the contract was handled and demand a return to the practice that 
is otherwise in effect in other departments and that the janitors be treated no less kindly or 
generously. He made a motion that the Commission go on record at least complaining 
about the conduct of the Purchasing Department. 

Commissioner Hardeman stated that this is a public comment period. At the conclusion of 
public comment, motions can be discussed at that time. 

Theresa Koller, Street Artists, requested the Commission to place the reinstatement of 
spaces J8 and J9 on the Commission's agenda. Commissioner Hardeman replied that the 
street artists were directed to work with staff on this item and they should continue to 
work with staff. If staff does not bring this item back to the Commission, the Commission 
will not act on it. 

Commissioner Hardeman asked staff to brief the Commission regarding the janitorial 
contract. Julie Van Nostern, Port's Legal Counsel, indicated that the Port has no authority 
or control over it. Under the City's Charter, the Purchaser has this authority. In the past, 
there have been circumstances in which the departments, in working with the Purchaser, 
have been allowed to directly contract as long as the City procedures are followed. In 
this instance, the person that might have been initially administering the contract did not 
appreciate that the Port could have done that and turned it over to the Purchaser. It wasn't 
until it was already well in its way for bid that the Port became aware that it was not going 
to be the direct contracting party. The Mayor's office has been looking at this in general 
and it is within their control. 

Commissioner Hardeman requested the Executive Director to have a staff person report 
back to the Commission regarding this matter. As well, he requested staff to include in 
the report if other departments, besides the Port, are having the same problem. Ms. Fei 
Tsen, Director of Real Estate and Asset Management, responded that staff will report back 
to the Commission at the next meeting with a report of what actions the City Purchaser has 
taken. Commissioner Herman reiterated that we should communicate our displeasure of 
the City Purchaser's actions and object to the premise that there should be uniformity 

M031197.igq "6- 



among certain groups of workers. The Commission should receive a full and 
comprehensive review of what has transpired. Mr. Wong replied that staff will put 
together this information and report back at the next meeting. He added that a 
representative from the Purchasing Department will be invited to the next meeting to 
provide the Commission the requested information and answer any questions. 

11. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

At 4:35 p.m., the Commission Secretary announced that the Commission will withdraw to 
executive session to discuss the following matters: 

A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: ,_ Price Terms of Payment /_ Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Pier 80 

Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*NorCal Representative : Mike Sangiacomo, President and Don Moriel, Executive 
Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment S_ Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and NorCal, regarding the property located at Pier 80. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is 
closed to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Mission Bay bordered by Illinois Street and 
Terry Francois Blvd. and Mission Rock Street 



M031197.igq 



Person Negotiating : Port representative: V. Fei Tsen, Director of Real Estate 

and Asset Management 

*Catellus Representative : Doug Stimpson, Vice President and CFO, Bay Area 

Development 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and Catellus, regarding the property located at Mission Bay. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

D. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions 
(S.F. Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 

At 5:20 p.m., Commissioners Hardeman, McCarthy, Lee, Cook and Herman 
returned from executive session and convened in public session. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval not to disclose any 

information discussed in the executive session; Commissioner Lee 
seconded the motion. 

The meeting was adjourned at 5:22 p.m. 



M031197.igq "8" 



/ 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



* 



REGULAR MEETING 

4:00 P.M.( TI^ARCH25. 1992 > 
FERRY BUILDING, SUITE 3100 
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 



DOCUMENTS DEPT. 



07 



AGENDA 



1. ROLL CALL 



MAR 21 1997 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



*-lv fry 



2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 06, 1997 Special Meeting 

- March 11, 1997 Regular Meeting 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Executive Director's Report 

4. MARITIME 

5. REAL ESTATE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT 

A. Approval of Permit to Use Property for the National Park Service at the Hyde Street 
Pier. (Resolution No. 97-25) 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

A. Approval of legislative actions necessary for the vacation of portions of Berry Street 
and Second Street. (Resolution No. 97-26) 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. Authorization to issue a Request for Proposals ("RFP") for Planning and Urban 

Design, Architectural and Real Estate Consulting Services for Mixed Use Opportunity 
Areas. (Resolution No. 97-27) 

8. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 

9. CONSENT CALENDAR 

10. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 



A032597.igq 



1- 



11. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is closed 
to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is closed 
to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Mission Bay bordered by Illinois Street and 
Terry Francois Blvd. and Mission Rock Street 

Person Negotiating : Port representative: V. Fei Tsen, Director of Real Estate 
and Asset Management 

*Catellus Representative : Doug Stimpson, Vice President and CFO, Bay Area 
Development 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and Catellus, regarding the property located at Mission Bay. 

This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

C. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is closed 
to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Various sites along the southern waterfront within the Port 
Commission's jurisdiction 

Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*Hutchison International Port Holdings Representative: Derek Harrington, 
Maritime Representative 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and Hutchison Port Holdings, regarding various sites along the 
southern waterfront within the Port's jurisdiction. 



) 



A032597.igq 



-2- 



This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

D. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING ANTICIPATED AND 
EXISTING LITIGATION MATTERS: 

1) Discuss existing litigation matters pursuant to subdivision (a) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 (one case) 

(a) Proano v. CCSF; San Francisco Superior Court No. 979574 

2) Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of California Government Code 
Section 54956.9 (one case) 

(a) Red and White Fleet, Inc. (formerly Harbor Carriers, Inc., a subsidiary of 
Crowley Corporation) operating at Pier 41. 

3) Discuss significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 (one case). 

E. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 
Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 



12. ADJOURNMENT 



Public comment is permitted on any matter within Port jurisdiction, and is not limited to agenda 
items. Public comment on non-agenda items may be raised during New Business/Public 
Comment. Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the Commission Secretary. 

Please contact the Commission Secretary at 274-0406 if you have any questions regarding the 
agenda. 



A032597.igq 



-3- 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 




MEMORANDUM 



March 14, 1997 



Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 41 5 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James R. Herman 



Douglas F. Wong ,-Jtu 
Executive Director 



SUBJECT: Approval of Permit to Use Property for the National Park Service at the Hyde 
Street Pier. 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE PERMIT TO USE PROPERTY 



BACKGROUND 

The San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park ("Maritime Park"), which is an independent 
unit of the National Park Service ("NPS"), currently occupies the Hyde Street Pier (Port Facility 
2500), which contains approximately 26,066 square feet, and the Hyde Street right-of-way north 
of Jefferson Street (Port Facility 4001), which contains approximately 27,740 square feet. These 
Port facilities occupied by the Maritime Park include open paved land and open pier space, as well 
as several buildings used by the Maritime Park for a book store, restrooms, ship maintenance, 
small craft maintenance, and educational programs. The Maritime Park also uses water area 
adjacent to the Hyde Street Pier for the berthing and display of historic ships, including the Alma, 
Balclutha, Eppleton Hall, Eureka, Hercules, and C. A. Thayer, as well as various small craft. 
This Port property occupied by the Maritime Park (collectively, the "Premises") constitutes only 
a portion of the Maritime Park area, which also incorporates Aquatic Park, the Aquatic Park 
Bathhouse/ Maritime Museum, Victorian Park (including the cable car turnaround), and Building 
E at Fort Mason (including library, archives, and administrative offices). The existing uses of the 
Maritime Park as they relate to Port property are shown on the attached area plan. 



THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 5A 



Agenda Item No. 5A 
Page 2 



The history of the Maritime Park began in 1950 with the formation of the San Francisco Maritime 
Museum Association ("Association") as a private, nonprofit organization to operate a maritime 
museum and to acquire ships relating to early California history. In 1951, the Association opened 
the Maritime Museum in the Aquatic Park Bathhouse, and in 1954, it purchased the Balclutha. 
In 1957, a California State Park unit was established to display historic ships at the Hyde Street 
Pier, and in 1963, the Hyde Street Pier was opened to the public as the San Francisco Maritime 
State Historical Park. Congress established the Golden Gate National Recreation Area 
("GGNRA") in 1972, and in 1977, the State transferred its historic vessels to the GGNRA, and 
it allowed the GGNRA to assume operation and control over the Premises. In 1978, the 
Association transferred ownership of the Balclutha and other collections to the NPS, and the 
Association changed its name to the National Maritime Museum Association, becoming one of 66 
associations across the nation dedicated to cooperating with specific national park units. Finally, 
in 1988, the Maritime Park was established as a separate administrative unit of the NPS. 

On June 17, 1977, the Port entered into an agreement with the State of California and the NPS, 
whereby the State agreed and authorized the NPS to assume operation and control of the Premises, 
and the Port and the NPS agreed to release the State of California of any responsibility concerning 
the Premises, so long as the NPS continued to occupy the Premises. The only agreement 
specifying the arrangement between the Port and the NPS is a one page letter agreement dated 
April 12, 1977, which provided that the NPS could continue berthing historic vessels on a month- 
to-month basis, and in return would pay the Port $2,000.00 per month, and "assume responsibility 
for all day-to-day maintenance and police services in the area assigned to them. " Although a more 
formal agreement was not subsequently entered into between the NPS and the Port, the NPS has 
continued to pay monthly payments to the Port by means of a purchase order/service requisition, 
with the payments in 1995 equaling $2,874.96 per month. The Association maintains its 
relationship with the Maritime Park pursuant to a Cooperative Agreement, under which the 
Association conducts education programs, runs the bookstore, and sponsors special events. The 
proceeds of these activities support the Maritime Park. 

In 1992, Port staff and the NPS began negotiations on a formal agreement regarding the Hyde 
Street Pier, and they have now reached agreement on the Permit to Use Property which is before 
you today for your approval. 

PROPOSED PERMIT TO USE PROPERTY 

1. Permittee : National Park Service. 

2. Premises : Space on the Hyde Street right-of-way (Port Facility 4001), containing 
approximately 27,740 square feet, space on the Hyde Street Pier (Port Facility 2500), 
which contains approximately 26,066 square feet of pier improvements, and adjacent water 
area, as delineated on the attached site plan. 



Agenda Item No. 5A 
Page 3 



Term : Month-to-month, commencing April 1, 1997. The Permit may be terminated by 
either party upon 30 days' prior written notice. 

Use Fee : $3,583.29 per month, which represents $0.07 per square foot, based upon the 
pier and land area. This monthly fee is subject to adjustment to reflect any increase in 
insurance premiums paid by the Port to insure the premises. 

Permitted Uses : The uses permitted under the Permit are explicitly and comprehensively 
prescribed. The Premises are to be used to berth specified historic vessels for touring by 
visitors. Small boats and occasional visits by other vessels are permitted, and 
maintenance and restoration of historic vessels are permitted. Structures on the Premises, 
which must be used for park purposes, are limited to specified buildings. Contractors 
performing maintenance on the vessels or pier must provide the Port with evidence of 
specified liability insurance, naming the Port as additional insured. Other permitted uses 
include: a small boat shop, a carpentry shop (for vessel maintenance), and a maritime 
bookstore 

The Permit also allows educational programs administered by the Association, pursuant 
to a Cooperative Agreement with the NPS. The Maritime Education Program, which is 
conducted during the school year, teaches maritime history and customs, and nautical 
skills. This program is offered to schools throughout northern California, with free 
opportunities for intercity schools to participate. The Association may also permit Special 
Events and Overnight Stays, provided the Association executes an Indemnity Agreement 
in favor of the Port in a form approved by the City Attorney, and furnishes the Port with 
proof of compliance by the Association with insurance requirements approved by the 
City's Risk Manager. These insurance requirements include general liability insurance and 
automobile liability insurance with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, 
Workers' Compensation Insurance, Personal Property Insurance, and Protection and 
Indemnity Insurance (Watercraft Liability) with limits of not less than $5,000,000 per 
occurrence. Special events to be held on the Premises shall be limited to private parties, 
such as weddings, concerts, and public programs, such as sea chanting concerts and the 
annual Festival of the Sea. Overnight Stays shall be limited to school children involved 
in the educational programs conducted by the Association. Any third party must sign a 
sub-permit which also includes an indemnity provision in favor of the Port in a form 
approved by the City Attorney. Excepting the Overnight Stays indicated above, the 
Premises shall be open to the general public only during daylight hours. 

Special Provisions : The Permit includes most standard provisions required by the City 
Attorney for such permits. Special provisions of the Permit which vary from the standard 
provisions of Port permits are as follows: 



Agenda Item No. 5A 
Page 4 



) 



) 



Maintenance Responsibilities . Permittee shall be responsible at its sole cost and 
expense to maintain the Premises in good working order, condition, and repair, 
including maintenance of piers, piles, and substructure. 

Improvements and Alterations . Permittee shall not commence any construction 
activity, other than routine maintenance and repairs to existing facilities, until such 
time as the parties have entered into a long-term lease, with the exception of a 
3,000 square foot multipurpose building (whose construction has now been 
completed) . No improvements or alterations are to be made to the Premises by 
Permittee unless it has obtained approvals and permits from all government 
agencies having jurisdiction, including but not limited to Port building permits. 

Indemnity /Insurance Deposits/Claims . A fundamental issue in negotiating the 
Permit was the inability of the NPS to indemnify the Port or to provide the Port 
with liability insurance. To do so would literally require a specific act of 
Congress. To address this issue, the Permit contains the following provisions: 

(i) The Port will provide the liability insurance on the Premises. The cost of 
the premium for this coverage was a component in setting the permit fee. 

(ii) The Permittee is required to provide a $2,500 Security/Insurance Deposit. 
In addition to providing security for the faithful performance of the Permit, this 
deposit is available to cover the $2,500 deductible amount required under the 
Port's insurance policy covering the Premises. The Permittee agrees that the Port 
may apply the Security /Insurance Deposit against obligations that are the 
Permittee's under the Permit, including the payment of any deductible amount due 
under the Port's insurance policy covering the Premises as a result of a claim 
arising from any cause whatsoever occurring on the Premises. If any portion of 
the Security /Insurance Deposit is so paid, Permittee shall immediately replenish the 
Security/Insurance Deposit to the original amount. 

(iii) Permittee agrees to comply with certain requirements and procedures of 
Port's insurance carrier regarding claims or potential claims involving the 
Premises. 

(iv) As indicated above, the Association shall obtain certain insurance involving 
its activities on the Premises, naming the Port as additionally insured, and shall 
also indemnify the Port. Similar indemnity agreements shall also be obtained from 
all other sub-permits of the Permittee. 

(v) As indicated above, all contractors on the Premises shall have specified 
insurance, which names the Port as additional insured. 



Agenda Item No. 5A 
Page 5 



) 



Signs . The Permittee must obtain consent from the Port for all signs, 
advertisements, awnings, banners, and exterior decorations, except for the 
following, provided they are not visible from Jefferson Street: Warning signs, 
visitors' directions, painted names and home ports of ships, and historic 
descriptions. The Permittee may also fly specified flags from vessels berthed at 
the Premises, without the Port's prior consent. 

South End Rowing Club Access . Subject to certain conditions, the Permittee shall 
allow the South End Rowing Club access across the Premises between Jefferson 
Street and the rear fence service entrance to the South End Rowing Club facility, 
whose location is identified on the attached site plan. 

Lease Negotiation . The Port and Permittee agree that they shall cooperate in good 
faith to commence negotiations on a new lease for the Premises within 30 days of 
the date this Permit is executed. 



Prepared by: Kirk W. Bennett, Sr. Property Manager, Northern Waterfront/Fisherman's Wharf 



) 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\NATIONAL.KB\ibn\March 13, 1997 



PORT COMMISSION 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-25 



WHEREAS, 



Charter Section B3.581 empowers the Port Commission with the power and 
duty to use, conduct, operate, maintain, manage, regulate and control the Port 
area of San Francisco; and 



WHEREAS, 



under Charter Section B3. 581(g) leases granted or made by the Port 
Commission shall be administered exclusively by the operating forces of the 
Port Commission; and 



WHEREAS, 



RESOLVED, 



Port staff has negotiated all the terms and conditions of a proposed Permit to 
Use Property with the National Park Service on terms and conditions outlined 
in Agenda Item 5A for the Port Commission meeting of March 25, 1997, 
which includes provisions that are either not covered by the Leasing 
Parameters approved by the Commission, or differ from those of the Port's 
standard Permit to Use Property agreement; now therefore, be it 

that the Port Commission hereby approves the Permit to Use Property between 
the Port and the National Park Services on the terms and conditions outlined 
in the Memorandum for Agenda Item No. 5 A of the Port Commission meeting 
on March 25, 1997, and the Port Commission authorizes the Executive 
Director of the Port, or his designee, to execute said Permit to Use Property, 
in such final form as is substantially in the form on file with the Secretary of 
the Port Commission for Agenda Item No. 5 A and in such final form as 
approved by the City Attorney. 



/ hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its meeting 
of March 25, 1997. 



Secretary 



G:\WP51\AGENDAS\NATIONAL.KB\ibn\March 14, 1997 







•mjh. : y vnf\ 



. 



:> 



) 




PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 



TO: 



FROM: 



MEMORANDUM 

March 25,1997 

MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 
Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee, Vice President 
Hon. James Herman 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. Denise McCarthy 

Douglas Wong /1$^ 
Executive Directop^ 




Ferry Building 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Telephone 415 274 0400 

Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 

Cable SFPORTCOMM 

Writer 



SUBJECT: Vacation of portions of Berry Street and Second Street 

DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: AUTHORIZE STAFF TO INITIATE THE 
PROCESS OF VACATING PORTIONS OF BERRY STREET AND SECOND STREET 
AS DESCRIBED BELOW: 



The proposed ballpark at China Basin will require vacating portions of Berry Street 
and Second Street as shown on Exhibits 1, 2, and 3. The process for vacating these 
streets is set forth in the City's Public Works Code. Initiating this process requires the 
Commission's consent. With the Commission's consent, staff will work with the Director 
of Public Works to notify utilities of the proposed vacation and address vehicle access 
issues, and work with the Department of City Planning to review the consistency of the 
street vacations with the City's General Plan. Once these steps are completed, and subject 
to the Port Commission's approval of an agreement to lease the site for the ballpark, staff 
will ask the Commission to approve the street vacations. The Board of Supervisors will 
also be asked to approve this action. 

The portion of Second Street, between King and Berry, proposed to be vacated 
(Exhibit 1), will be used for pedestrian access to the ballpark and vehicular access to a 
parking garage for ballpark employees and the South Beach Marina. The portion of Berry 
Street, between Second and Third Streets, proposed to be vacated (Exhibit 2), is directly 
underneath the proposed ballpark site. 

In conjunction with the ballpark project, Berry Street, east of Second Street 
(Exhibit 3), will be used by the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency to build Phase II of 
South Beach Park. Parking for South Beach Marina will be provided underneath the 
expanded park area. However, this portion of Berry Street is not a dedicated and accepted 
city street so it is not necessary to formally vacate that street area. 

THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 6A 



Agenda Item No. 6A 
March 20, 1997 
Page 2 



Staff recommends that the Port Commission authorize Port staff to initiate the 
procedures for the vacation of Second and Berry Streets, as described. Final action on the 
vacation will not occur until environmental review for the ballpark is completed and the 
Port Commission and the Board of Supervisors approve the ballpark project. 



Prepared by: Alex Lee, Director, Facilities and Operations 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-26 



WHEREAS, 

WHEREAS, 
WHEREAS, 
WHEREAS, 

WHEREAS, 



WHEREAS, 



RESOLVED, 



certain streets described herein must be vacated in order to accommodate 
the proposed ballpark at China Basin, if approved; and 

Berry Street must be vacated between Second and Third Streets; and 

Second Street must be vacated between King and Berry Streets; and 

it is necessary to notify the public of the possible vacation of the noted 
portions of Second Street and Berry Street prior to consideration and 
action by the Board of Supervisors; and 

the Port is responsible for initiating the process for vacation of Port 
streets so that the Department of Public Works can take various actions, 
including notifying utilities, prior to consideration of the vacation of any 
City streets; and 

final action on the vacation of the noted portions of Second Street and 
Berry Street shall not occur until environmental review on the ballpark 
project is complete and the ballpark project is approved by the Port 
Commission and the Board of Supervisors; now, therefore, be it 

that the San Francisco Port Commission hereby authorizes staff to 
initiate the procedures for the vacations of Berry and Second Streets 
described herein. 



I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Port Commission at its 
meeting of March 25, 1997. 



Secretary 



G:\JWR\MEMOS\AGEND-3.DOC 




KING 

('57' V/IDE) 



STREET 

(153' WIDE) 




is. 



BLOCK 3301 
LOT 1 
C'JTY 



S F PORT JURISDICTION 

BERRY 



in 



00 



STREET 



SLOCK 
LOT 



9900 
46C 



CJTY 



SLOCK 3302 
LOT 1 
CJTY 






LEGEND 
[__.._] STREET AREA PROPOSED TO BE VACATED 



BY DATE 



DR 



AMN J/10/97 



TR 



CK. 



AP 



AP 



EXHIBIT 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 



PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF SECOND 
STREET BETWEEN KING AND BERRY STS. 



IVED 



CITY ENG*EB* 



SCALE /" = 80' 
SHEET / 
OF / SHEETS 



FLE 



SUR 596 



CHANGE 



FILE; 6ALLrASK.G*'G-H£rt r't 




STREET 

(153' WIDE) 




Q 

o 
o 

LU 

82.5' 



r) 



in 



OCX 

LOT 1 

CJTY 



252. 02 '(MR A). 
255'(ASSESS0R) 



3301 



BERRY 



to 



STREET 



IS 



£3 



.OCK 
L0~ 



9900 
46 C 



CJTY 



184.44'(ASSESS0R) 
181.12'(MRA) 

SLOCK 3302 
LOT 1 
CJTY / 

LEGEND 



^<£ 








<f 









l:1__j street area proposed to be vacated 

(mra) data: martin m. ron associates 
survey for sf redevelopment agency 

(as) data: sf county assessor's maps 



BY ; DATE 



DR. 



AMN '-J/W/97 



m 



ex. 



APP. 



APP. 



CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 



PROPOSED VACATION OF BERRY STREET 
BETWEEN SECOND ST. AND THE EMBARCADERO 



APPRO\ 



DATE 



EXHIBIT 




SCALE 7" = 80' 
SHEET / 
OF / SHEETS 



RLE 

SUR 696 



CHANGE 



FILE: BALLPARK. CV.G-'v1liV PI 



PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO 

MEMORANDUM 




Ferry Building 
San Francisco, CA 94111 
March 25 1997 Telephone 415 274 0400 

' Telex 275940 PSF UR 

Fax 415 274 0528 
Cable SFPORTCOMM 
Writer 

TO: MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

Hon. Michael Hardeman, President 
Hon. Denise McCarthy, Vice President 
Hon. Frankie G. Lee 
Hon. Preston Cook 
Hon. James Herman 

FROM: Douglas F. Wong, fifi* 

Executive Director 

SUBJECT: Authorization to issue a request for proposals for planning and urban design, 
architectural, and real estate consulting services for mixed use opportunity 
areas. 



DIRECTOR'S RECOMMENDATION: AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ISSUE A REQUEST 
FOR PROPOSALS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION 

The Port of San Francisco is ready to embark on the next phase of waterfront planning. 
Due to the efforts of many individuals resulting in the recent certification of the 
Waterfront Land Use Plan ("Waterfront Plan") Environmental Impact Report, the 
upcoming public hearings to adopt the Waterfront Plan, and the Concept Agreement 
between BCDC, Save San Francisco Bay and the Port, the foundation is laid for the Port's 
developing what the Waterfront Plan has identified as "Mixed Use Opportunity Areas." 
These are waterfront properties where commercial development is proposed to be 
combined with maritime, open space and public access activities. Many of these areas are 
envisioned to be combinations of seawall lots and piers. Port staff expects significant 
interest in the opportunities available at these properties. The Port also anticipates being 
able to generate revenue exceeding the threshold of Administrative Code Section 2.6-1. 
Accordingly, it is intended these properties be made available through a competitive 
process. 

At this time, Port staff is intending to focus on two mixed use opportunity areas: 
Broadway at the Embarcadero (Seawall Lots 321, 322-1, 323 and 324, and Pier 9) and 
Bryant Street at the Embarcadero (Seawall Lots 330 and 328, and Piers 26, 28, 30-32). 
These sites were selected because of their locational attributes, the relative strength of the 
localized real estate market conditions and their suitability for development. Although the 

THIS PRINT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO. 7A 



Agenda_7_A 

Approval To Issue RFP For Consulting Services 

Port Commission 

Page 2 



Port's intention is to focus on the seawall lot development, it will also address the issue of 
connecting landside development with waterside uses and other criteria identified in the 
Waterfront Plan and the Urban Design and Public Access Element. 

The next step in this process is for staff to prepare Requests For Proposals ("RFP") to 
identify the best use for these properties, request and evaluate developer proposals, select 
a developer and negotiate attendant agreements (development agreement, lease, etc.) with 
the developer. Preparing these developer RFP's requires that the Port conduct some 
preliminary development planning and feasibility analysis. These actions will be taken 
pursuant to the implementation process described in the Waterfront Plan (Chapter 5, pages 
173-174). The Port's analysis will include the evaluation of alternative development 
programs for these two areas and will include the establishment of advisory groups to 
provide public input to the Port on potential development projects that may be pursued. 

To properly and expeditiously accomplish these objectives, Port staff requires the 
assistance of outside consultants to assist with some of the development feasibility analysis 
and preparation of the developer RFPs. These consultants will provide planning and 
urban design, architectural, and real estate consulting services necessary to prepare and 
issue the RFPs and assist the Port in evaluating potential development projects proposed in 
response. 

Scope of Work 

The main areas of expertise that the Port is seeking in the consultant or consulting team 
are: planning and urban design (including expertise in site planning, design and layout of 
maritime uses such as ferries, excursion boats, marinas and historic ships, community 
outreach and consensus building), architecture (including historic preservation and 
maritime design experience), and real estate economic and market research. 

The consultant will be expected to assist the Port in addressing the following types of 
issues within each discipline: 

Planning and Urban Design 

• Preparing conceptual development plans that consider preferred land uses, market 
data, parking requirements and compatibility with adjacent properties (including 
illustrative materials); 

• Preparing pre-development studies for possible developments on individual seawall 
lots and/or piers; 

• Obtaining input from key "stakeholders," presenting analyses to community groups 
and regulatory agencies for public input; and 



Agenda_7_A 

Approval To Issue RFP For Consulting Services 

Port Commission 

Page 3 



• Reviewing pertinent documents such as the Waterfront Plan, including the Urban 
Design and Public Access Element, to ensure that proposed developments take into 
consideration the criteria contained in these documents. 

Architecture 

• Preparing design studies for possible developments on individual seawall lots 
and/or piers; 

• Performing physical analyses of seawall lots and/or piers and considering such 
factors as height limits, parcel size and configuration, adjacent uses, views and 
other relevant information; and 

• Performing analysis and review of existing historic or potentially historic buildings 
in conjunction with possible developments. 

Real Estate Consulting 

• Performing market research to determine current rental rates, vacancy rates, 
industry trends and typical lease terms for various land uses; 

• Performing feasibility studies for possible developments and land uses, including 
analyzing the development potential of a site or land use in terms of market 
demand, revenues and expenses, estimated development costs, community 
concerns, public objectives, and regulatory and physical parameters; 

• Drafting developer solicitations such as request for qualifications or request for 
proposals; and 

• Reviewing the proposed business terms of real estate transactions. 

The Port currently has a total of $100,000 budgeted for these services. The expenditure 
has been approved as part of the Port's Capital Plan. 

Staff requests the Commission authorize staff to prepare and issue a request for proposals 
for the services described above, pursuant to which the Port could award two consulting 
contracts, one for each mixed use opportunity area. After evaluating the consultant 
proposals received, staff will return to the Commission for approval to award the 
contracts. 



Prepared by: Paul Osmundson 
Director, Planning and Development 



PORT COMMISSION 
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 

RESOLUTION NO. 97-27 



WHEREAS, the Waterfront Land Use Plan ("Waterfront Plan") identifies Mixed Use 
Opportunity Areas along the San Francisco waterfront where commercial 
development is proposed to be combined with maritime, open space and 
public access activities; and 

WHEREAS, these areas are envisioned in the Waterfront Plan to be combinations of 
seawall lots and piers; and 

WHEREAS, two of these properties are located at Broadway at the Embarcadero and 
Bryant Street at the Embarcadero; and 

WHEREAS, the implementation of the Waterfront Plan calls for more detailed feasibility 
analysis of potential Port development projects, including market analysis, 
conceptual design, physical assessments and community input; and 

WHEREAS, issuance of requests for proposals for these properties and selection of 
proposals requires specialized services; and 

WHEREAS, the types of specialized services the Port requires to address these needs 
include planning and urban design, architectural, historic preservation, 
maritime design, and real estate market and economic research and 
analysis; and 

WHEREAS, Port staff does not have the specialized expertise or staff resources to 
perform these services in-house; and 

WHEREAS, the Port has budgeted $100,000 for this purpose in the Capital Plan; now, 
therefore be it 

RESOLVED, that the Commission hereby authorizes staff to issue a Request For 

Proposals for planning and urban design, architectural, historic preservation 
and real estate consulting services for mixed use opportunity areas near 
Broadway at the Embarcadero and Bryant Street and the Embarcadero, as 
identified in the Waterfront Land Use Plan. 

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Poit Commission at its 
meeting of March 25, 1997. 



Secretary 



SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 



MARCH 25, 1997 

MINUTES OF THE MEETING 



MEMBERS, PORT COMMISSION 

HON. MICHAEL HARDEMAN, PRESIDENT 
HON. DENISE McCARTHY, VICE PRESIDENT 
HON. FRANKIE G. LEE 
HON. PRESTON COOK 
HON. JAMES HERMAN 



DOUGLAS F. WONG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 

DOCUMENTS DEPT. 

OCT 8 1239 

SAN FRANCISCO 
PUBLIC LIBRARY 



CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 
PORT COMMISSION 

MINUTES OF THE MEETING 
MARCH 25, 1997 

1. ROLL CALL 

The meeting was called to order by Commission President Michael Hardeman at 4:03 
p.m. The following Commissioners were present: Michael Hardeman, Denise McCarthy, 
Frankie Lee, Preston Cook, James Herman. 

2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 06, 1997 Special Meeting 

- March 11, 1997 Regular Meeting 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the minutes of the meetings 
were adopted. 

At 4:05 p.m., the Commission Secretary announced that the Commission will withdraw to 
executive session to confer with Legal Counsel to discuss significant exposure to litigation 
pursuant to subdivision (b) of California Government Code Section 54956.9 (one case) 
(Heard out of order) 

At 5:08 p.m., the Commission returned from executive session and convened in public 
session. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval to not disclose any information 
discussed in the executive session; Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. 
All of the Commissioners were in favor. 

3. EXECUTIVE 

A. Executive Director's Report : Mr. Wong indicated that in our continuing pursuit to 
revitalize our maritime business, he was pleased to report that San Francisco 
Drydock, who operates one of the largest drydock facilities on the Pacific Coast 
successfully completed a multimillion dollar contract with Crystal Symphony. Crystal 
Symphony will be at the Port starting May 19 through May 29. The vessel will then 
be berthed at Pier 35, where a thousand passengers will embark for a 12-day round 
trip to Alaska. It is an itinerary at the Port that will be offered every 12 days during 
the summer. The ship repair industry will generate millions of dollars of economic 
benefits to the City and in the ten-day period, it will employ more than 500 
employees. 

He indicated that Carolyn Macmillan has tendered her letter of resignation, moving 
onto an organization who has a much larger marketing budget. He wished her the 

M032597.igq -1- 



best and thanked her for her work at the Port. 

4. MARITIME 

5. REAL ESTATE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT 

A. A pproval of Permit to Use Property for the National Park Service at the Hyde Street 
Pier. (Resolution No. 97-25) 

Mr. Kirk Bennett, Senior Property Manager, stated that the San Francisco Maritime 
National Historical Park currently occupies the Hyde Street Pier and the Hyde Street 
right-of-way north of Jefferson Street. These facilities occupied by the Maritime Park 
include open paved land and open pier space. The Maritime Park also uses water area 
adjacent to the Hyde Street Pier for the berthing and display of historic ships. This 
Port property occupied by the Maritime Park constitutes only a portion of the 
Maritime Park area, which also incorporates Aquatic Park, the Aquatic Park 
Bathhouse/Maritime Museum, Victorian Park and Building E at Fort Mason. The 
history of the Maritime Park began in 1950 with the formation of the San Francisco 
Maritime Museum Association as a private, nonprofit organization to operate a 
maritime museum and to acquire ships relating to early California history. In 1951, 
the Association opened the Maritime Museum in the Aquatic Park bathhouse, and in 
1954, it purchased the Balclutha. In 1957, a California State Park unit was 
established to display historic ships at the Hyde Street Pier. In 1972 and in 1977, the 
State transferred its historic vessels to the GGNRA and it allowed the GGNRA to 
assume operation and control over the premises. In 1978, the association transferred 
ownership of the Balclutha and other collections to the National Park Service (NPS), 
and the association changed its name to the National Maritime Museum Association. 
In 1988, the Maritime Park was established as a separate administrative unit of the 
NPS. 

On June 17, 1977, the Port entered into an agreement with the State of California and 
the NPS, whereby the State agreed and authorized the NPS to assume operation and 
control of the premises. The only agreement specifying the arrangement between the 
Port and the NPS is a one page letter agreement, which provided that the NPS could 
continue berthing historic vessels on a month-to-month basis and in return pay the 
Port $2,000 per month and assume responsibility for all day-to-day maintenance and 
police services in the area assigned to them. Although a more formal agreement was 
not subsequently entered into between the NPS and the Port, the NPS has continued to 
pay monthly payments to the Port by means of a purchase order/service requisition, 
with the payments in 1995 equaling $2,874.96 per month. The association maintains 
its relationship with the Maritime Park pursuant to a Cooperative Agreement, under 
which the association conducts educational programs, runs the bookstore and sponsors 
special events. The proceeds of these activities support the Maritime Park. 

In 1992, Port staff and the NPS began negotiations on a formal agreement regarding 
the Hyde Street Pier, and they have now reached agreement on the Permit to Use 
Property. The term of the lease is month-to-month, commencing April 1, 1997. The 

M032597.igq -2- 



fee is $3,583.29 per month subject to adjustment to reflect any increase in insurance 
premiums paid by the Port to insure the premises. The premises are to be used to 
berth specified historic vessels for touring by visitors. Small boats and occasional 
visits by other vessels are permitted as well as maintenance and restoration of historic 
vessels. Structures on the premises, which must be used for park purposes, are 
limited to specified buildings. 

The permit also allows educational programs administered by the Association, 
pursuant to a Cooperative Agreement with the NPS. The Maritime Education 
Program, which is conducted during the school year, teaches maritime history and 
customs and nautical skills. This program is offered to schools throughout northern 
California, with fee opportunities for intercity schools to participate. The Association 
may also permit Special Events and Overnight Stays, provided the Association 
executes an Indemnity Agreement in favor of the Port in a form approved by the City 
Attorney and furnishes the Port with proof of compliance by the Association with 
insurance requirements approved by the City's Risk Manager. These insurance 
requirements include general liability insurance and automobile liability insurance 
with limits of not less than $1 ,000,000 per occurrence. Overnight stays shall be 
limited to school children involved in the educational programs conducted by the 
Association. Any third party must sign a sub-permit which also includes an indemnity 
provision in favor of the Port in a form approved by the City Attorney. Excepting the 
overnight stays, the premises shall be open to the general public only during daylight 
hours. 

Special provisions of the permit which vary from the standard provisions of Port 
permits are: 

(1) Permittee shall be responsible at its sole cost and expense to maintain the 
premises in good working order, condition and repair including maintenance of 
piers, piles and substructure. 

(2) Permittee shall not commence any construction activity other than routine 
maintenance and repairs to existing facilities. No improvements or alterations are 
to be made to the premises by permittee unless it has obtained approvals and 
permits from all government agencies having jurisdiction, including but not 
limited to Port building permits. 

(3) A fundamental issue in negotiating the permit was the inability of the NPS to 
indemnify the Port or to provide the Port with liability insurance. The permit 
contains the following provisions: 

a. The Port will provide the liability insurance on the premises. The cost of the 
premium for this coverage was a component in setting the permit fee. 

b. The permittee is required to provide a $2,500 security/insurance deposit. 

c. Permittee agrees to comply with certain requirements and procedures of 

M032597.igq -3- 



Port's insurance carrier regarding claims or potential claims involving the 
premises. 

d. The association shall obtain certain insurance involving its activities on the 
premises, naming the Port as additionally insured, and shall also indemnify 
the Port. 

e. All contractors on the premises shall have specified insurance, which names 
the Port as additional insured. 

(4) The permittee must obtain consent from the Port for all signs, advertisements, 
awnings, banners and exterior decorations, except for the following, provided 
they are not visible from Jefferson Street: warning signs, visitors directions, 
painted names and home ports of ships, and historic descriptions. 

(5) Subject to certain conditions, the permittee shall allow the South End Rowing 
Club access across the premises between Jefferson Street and the rear fence 
service entrance to the South End Rowing Club facility. 

(6) The Port and the permittee agree that they shall cooperate in good faith to 
commence negotiations on a new lease for the Premises within 30 days of the date 
this permit is executed. 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired if the representation of continued cooperation on 
the local advisory committee by the people working on the water quality, 
environmental issues and planning for the area could be encouraged. Mr. Bennett 
replied that since the National Park Service is a federal agency but is located on Port 
property, one of the issues discussed was they abide by all regulations, to which they 
agree. 

Commissioner Cook encouraged the Commission to vote affirmatively on this lease as 
NPS is a great organization. He hopes that NPS has a longer lease as they have 
maintained the facilities. They have provided and continue to provide a great deal of 
education and amusement for San Franciscans. He would like to see more of a 
permissive use of the facility, e.g., he hopes that adults or elderly citizens are 
included in the programs. He requested that the Port does not bind them strongly so 
as to inhibit all the good things they do or they plan to do in the future. Mr. William 
Thomas, of NPS, thanked Port staff, the Director and the Commission for their 
support of the lease. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner McCarthy 

seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the 
resolution was adopted. 

6. FACILITIES & OPERATIONS 

A. Approval of legislative actions necessary for the vacation of portions of Berry Street 

M032597.igq -4- 



and Second Street. (Resolution No. 97-26) 

Mr. Alex Lee, Director of Facilities and Operations, indicated that the resolution 
before the Commission authorizes staff to initiate the process of vacating portions of 
Berry Street and Second Street. Initiating this process requires the Commission's 
consent. With the Commission's consent, staff will work with the Director of Public 
Works to address utilities and vehicle access issues as well as work with the 
Department of City Planning. 

The portion of Second Street, between King and Berry, proposed to be vacated, will 
be used for pedestrian access to the ballpark and vehicular access to a parking garage 
for ballpark employees and the South Beach Marina. The portion of Berry Street, 
between Second and Third Streets, proposed to be vacated, is directly underneath the 
proposed ballpark site. 

In conjunction with the ballpark project, Berry Street, east of Second Street, will be 
used to build Phase II of the South Beach Park. Parking for South Beach Marina will 
be provided underneath the expanded park area. This portion of Berry Street is not a 
dedicated and accepted city street so it is not necessary to formally vacate that street 
area. Final action on the vacation will not occur until environmental review is done, 
which is scheduled to be completed July of this year. The Port Commission and the 
Board of Supervisors will have to approve the vacation of the streets. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval; Commissioner Cook 

seconded the motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the 
resolution was adopted. 

7. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 

A. Authorization to issue a Request for Proposals ("RFP") for Planning and Urban 

Design. Architectural and Real Estate Consulting Services for Mixed Use Opportunity 
Areas. (Resolution No. 97-27) 

Mr. Paul Osmundson, Director of Planning and Development, indicated that the 
Waterfront Land Use Plan identifies mixed use opportunity areas, which are areas 
where seawall lots and piers are combined and envisioned to be developed in the 
future with maritime, open space, public access and commercial recreation uses. At 
this time, staff focused on two areas identified in the Waterfront Plan: (1) Broadway 
at the Embarcadero (including Seawall Lots 321, 322-1, 323 and 324 as well as Pier 9) 
and (2) Bryant Street at the Embarcadero (which include Seawall Lots 330 and 328 
and Piers 26, 28, 30-32). 

The next step in this process is for staff to prepare Requests for Proposals to identify 
the best use for these properties, request and evaluate developer proposals, select a 
developer and negotiate attendant agreements. Preparing these developer RFP's 
requires that the Port conduct some preliminary development planning and feasibility 
analysis as outlined in the Waterfront Plan. The Port's analysis will include the 

M032597.igq -5- 



evaluation of alternative development programs for these two areas and will include 
the establishment of advisory groups to provide public input to the Port on potential 
development projects that may be pursued. 

The item before the Commission is to request the selection of professional services 
consultants to assist staff in the preparation of the RFPs. The main areas of expertise 
that staff will be seeking in the consultant team include planning and urban design, 
site planning, design and layout, maritime uses such as ferries, excursion boats, 
marinas and historic ships as well as other planning and urban design services such as 
community outreach and consensus building, architecture, historic preservation, real 
estate, economic and market research. The Port has a total of $100,000 budgeted for 
these services, which has been approved as part of the Port's Capital Plan. 

Staff requested the Commission to authorize staff to prepare and issue a request for 
proposals for the services described, pursuant to which the Port could award two 
consulting contracts, one for each mixed use opportunity area. After evaluating the 
consultant proposals received, staff will return to the Commission for approval to 
award the contracts. 

Commissioner McCarthy inquired how and who decides what will actually go out on 
an RFP. Mr. Osmundson replied that staff will ask the consultant to provide a 
recommendation. Staff already has a preliminary recommendation as the initial 
development RFP on each of the areas. Commissioner McCarthy wondered if this 
process will limit the Port's options and inquired how staff can obtain the most 
possible input for great ideas. Mr. Osmundson replied that to some extent, staff will 
be narrowing the possibilities for development within that area. Staff felt that it was 
appropriate and necessary to look at a broader area and perform a more refined 
analysis of the mixed use opportunity area and look at potential alternatives for all 
those properties prior to making a final decision of pursuing the development on one 
site. Staff will be narrowing, to the greatest extent possible, the potential uses on the 
site. 

Commissioner McCarthy recommended that this be done in the context of all the other 
planning processes and programs that are already in place. She added that the 
appropriate public entities are included in the advisory committee to allow 
coordination so that we're not doing this only from the Port's point of view. She 
wanted staff to ensure that everybody is brought to the table. She then commended 
staff for having an advisory team from the outset to work on this project. Mr. 
Osmundson indicated that Seawall Lot 330 is immediately adjacent to the South Beach 
redevelopment project area. Staff will work closely with the citizens advisory 
committee, the Chinatown Resource Center, Mayor's office, Golden Gateway 
Tenants, Telegraph Hill and lower Broadway area. 

Commissioner Lee indicated that he is unsure of the consultants' role and wondered if 
they will augment staff's work. Mr. Osmundson replied that staff will hire two 
consultants - one for the Broadway and Embarcadero and one for Bryant and 
Embarcadero. In terms of the fee, Commissioner Lee inquired if it is divided into 



M032597.igq 



-6- 



equal weights. Mr. Wong replied that we have $100,000 set aside in the capital 
budget but our goal is not to use all of it. We will be allocating the money 
accordingly. We have $100,000 at the outset and staff will keep a very tight rein on 
the money. Mr. Osmundson added that the main assistance that staff will be seeking 
from the consultants is in the subarea analysis, to do development site massing and 
building profiles on the area and the specific expertise in preparing the RFP for the 
developer for the specified use. Commissioner Lee stated that the most critical part 
would be the proper way of preparing the RFP. Mr. Osmundson indicated that the 
Urban Design and Public Access Plan is in the final stages of being completed. Staff 
intends to get a jump on the whole process. 

Commissioner Lee indicated that this is the first time, in a long time, that the Port will 
be doing a development. The first RFP that goes out is very important because it 
signifies a way of doing business at the Port in the next few years. He recommended 
that the Commission work closely with staff and consultant to ensure that they are in 
tune of what's sent out to the public. He echoed Commissioner McCarthy's opinion 
of maintaining a certain guideline but at the same time, not having it too restrictive. 
Mr. Osmundson indicated that the Port, approximately six years ago, did an 
international cruise ship terminal at Pier 30/32. At that time, some of the limitations 
on the specifics of the RFP were based on the fact that staff had not done any 
environmental review of potential development thus, staff was required to keep the 
RFP very vague and very open-ended. Now that the Waterfront EIR is certified and 
the mixed commercial land uses analyzed and urban design addressed, staff feels that 
the professional services procured will appropriately balance the creativity of the 
development community but. also give the public and the Port a defined envelope of 
development. 

ACTION: Commissioner Cook moved approval; Commissioner Lee seconded the 
motion. All of the Commissioners were in favor; the resolution was 
adopted. 

8. FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION 

9. CONSENT CALENDAR 

10. NEW BUSINESS / PUBLIC COMMENT 

Richard Leung, from SEIU Local 87, thanked the Commission for their support of its 
members. He wondered if the Port has any action regarding the janitorial contract and 
inquired about the status of the contract. Commissioner Hardeman suggested that he 
contact the City Purchaser's office, who is the awarding department. Mr. Wong indicated 
that Fei Tsen, Director of Real Estate and Asset Management, will provide Mr. Leung the 
phone number of the contact person at the City Purchaser's office who can give him the 
detailed information on this matter. Mr. Leung indicated that the reason for his presence 
at the meeting was he was informed that the issue was referred back to the Port 
Commission. He has already met with the City Purchaser's office a few weeks ago. Mr. 
Wong requested that he contact them now so he can be provided the status of the contract. 

M032597.igq -7- 



Commissioner Hardeman indicated that in the beginning of the year he had a conversation 
with the Executive Director about changing the meeting dates in November and 
December. He inquired if the Commission is amenable to having the meeting the third 
Tuesday of the month. However, in Commissioner McCarthy's quick review of her 
calendar, she indicated that she has a conflict and would rather keep the meeting dates as 
previously scheduled. After further discussion, Commissioner Hardeman inquired if the 
third Thursday of the month would be amenable to the Commission. Mr. Wong indicated 
that a memo will be circulated to the Commission to get a consensus of the meeting dates. 

Commissioner Hardeman indicated that the Commission is very discouraged that the Port 
is losing Carolyn Macmillan. He requested that appropriate commendation be made to 
Ms. Macmillan from the Commission. He thanked her for her service at the Port. 

11. EXECUTIVE SESSION 

At 5:55 p.m., the Commission Secretary announced that the Commission will withdraw to 
executive session to discuss the following: 

A. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is closed 
to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Berry Street and Second Street (China Basin). 
Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*San Francisco Giants Representative : Larry Baer, Executive Vice President 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment S_ Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and San Francisco Giants, regarding the proposed ballpark. 
This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 

B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is closed 
to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Port property located at Mission Bay bordered by Illinois Street and 
Terry Francois Blvd. and Mission Rock Street 

Person Negotiating: Port representative: V. Fei Tsen, Director of Real Estate 
and Asset Management 

*Catellus R epresentative : Doug Stimpson, Vice President and CFO, Bay Area 
Development 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment S_ Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and Catellus, regarding the property located at Mission Bay. 
This is specifically authorized under California Government Code Section 
54956.8. 



M032597.igq -8- 



C. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - This session is closed 
to anv non-Citv/Port representative. * 

1) Property : Various sites along the southern waterfront within the Port 
Commission's jurisdiction 

Person Negotiating : Port representative: Douglas F. Wong, Executive Director 
*Hutchison International Port Holdings Representative: Derek Harrington, 
Maritime Representative 

Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment / Both 

An executive session has been calendared to discuss real property negotiations 
between the Port and Hutchison Port Holdings, regarding various sites along the 
southern waterfront within the Port's jurisdiction. This is specifically authorized 
under California Government Code Section 54956.8. 

D. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING ANTICIPATED AND 
EXISTING LITIGATION MATTERS: 

1) Discuss existing litigation matters pursuant to subdivision (a) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 (one case) 

(a) Proano v. CCSF; San Francisco Superior Court No. 979574 

2) Initiation of litigation pursuant to subdivision (c) of California Government Code 
Section 54956.9 (one case) 

(a) Red and White Fleet, Inc. (formerly Harbor Carriers, Inc., a subsidiary of 
Crowley Corporation) operating at Pier 41. 

3) Discuss significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b) of California 
Government Code Section 54956.9 (one case). (Heard out of order) 

E. Vote in open session on whether to disclose Executive Session discussions (S.F. 
Admin. Code Sec. 67.14) 



At 6:50 p.m., Commissioners Hardeman, McCarthy, Lee, Cook and Herman returned 
from executive session and convened in public session. 

ACTION: Commissioner McCarthy moved approval to not disclose any information 

discussed in the executive session. Commissioner Lee seconded the motion. 
All of the Commissioners were in favor. 

The meeting was adjourned at 6:52 p.m. 



M032597.igq -9-