Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    March 2, 2011 3:38pm-4:08pm PST

3:38 pm
given the level of our emergence, and also $500,000 to fund a portion of the master plan for dredging of the central basin. the other reason we had to change the budget from what was approved is last year, the court staff assumed $12.5 million in available funding, and that is $2.7 million less than we have. in light of these changes, port developed a deappropriation solution. in most cases, reductions reflect project timing, so funds will be restored in by the year 2012/2013. for its staff is also proposing to fully or partially defund 6 capital project because the project are complete. the sources for the fiscal year 2011/2012 capital budget include $9.8 million in
3:39 pm
available funding with the appropriation proposal of $2.2 billion and two years of payment for the transbay cable. for fiscal year 2013, we have a much smaller capital budget, and that just reflects what we estimate will be our available funding. the proposed projects are as follows -- the court -- the port's maintenance dredging program for today will years. to be completed by the army corps of engineers. a clean-up of the historic building located at pier 70. replacement of the textures at pier 94, 96. the proposed capital budget also includes funding for an initial phases of an inch it -- and for stricter plan for peer 70.
3:40 pm
also included, this goes on the dry dock. to install a new, force still remain, open space and alternative energy projects that meet the guidelines outlined in the agreement. greening and beautification projects at the southern waterfront. renovation of an existing building to house the fisherman's wharf harbour office and funding for capital improvements that we need to make for leasing reserves. there's also many repairs and replacement needs included in this budget, from our emergency fund to our peers structures to store pumps, floats, and vendors to upgrade the upgrading of our elevator systems. if i could move to the slide. one thing that we have been very
3:41 pm
aware of is that the allocation of resources across the waterfront and the distribution of our proposed expenditures over two years in fisherman's wharf and the ne waterfront is about 33.6%. i would note that that includes dredging. very building in south area at 3%. southern waterfront at 20.9%. again, we will return to you for approval on february 22, and this will be submitted to the mayor's office as well as the city's capital planning committee. i'm joined here today with lawrence brown from finance, who prepared this budget and report, and together, we can answer your questions. thank you. >> thank you. any public comments on the capital plan? commissioners, any questions or comments? well, you did a great job.
3:42 pm
no questions. thank you. item 10a, request approval of the executive director's nomination of gary hoy, sagiv weiss-ishai, hanson tom, joy navarrete, and brad wilson to the port building code review board. >> the building code requires the building code board to hear public appeals related to interpretations made by the chief harbor engineer. sectiona 105 of the code defines the process and selection and appointment of the review board members. five members are required on the board. the members must be recommended by the ford executive director, and the recommended individuals must be approved and appointed by the port commission. the requirements for membership
3:43 pm
are split into two categories -- technical and non-technical. technical members are required to be certified building officials or registered as structural, architectural utility or fire protection engineers. non-technical members are required to have either technical skills or work experience related to construction. both technical and non-technical members must be employed by the city and county of san francisco. three members, including a minimum of two technical members, are required to form a quorum and an affirmative vote by three or more members is necessary for the review board to take an action. the maximum term of four board members is three years. section 105a limits the base of appeals heard by the review board to granting or denying of any permanent or revoking or refusing to revoke any permit under the current condition of
3:44 pm
the san francisco could. any order of the engineer involving construction messes assemblies or materials or where safety is involved, and any order or abatement resulting from the chief harbor engineer hearing and any notice of violation order issued pursuant to section 102a of the port building code. a review board is not responsible to hear appeals related to the enforcement of design or accessibility. the term limits of the current building code review board have expired. during that review board's term, only one appeal was filed. that case had no action taken, due to the lack of three or more affirmative votes on the matter. for a new term starting today, the executive director has nominated four of the sick -- existing board members for reappointment. one individual for appointment to the following position -- the
3:45 pm
recommendations for the technical board members are gary hoy, california registered architect employed by the department of public works, sagiv weiss-ishai, california engineer, employed by the five apartment, and hanson tom, employed by the department of building inspection. the non-technical board member recommendations are joy navarrete, environmental planner employed by the planning department, and bradley wilson, a california-registered engineer employed by the san francisco public utilities commission. the new nominee is sagiv weiss- ishai, who graduated from university of maryland in 2002 and worked in private industry until october 2007 when he filled his current position as a fire protection engineer with the san francisco fire department. in conclusion, at this time,
3:46 pm
engineering staff requests the port commission to approve and 25 individuals nominated by the port executive director to serve as review board members for maximum term of three years. i'm open to any questions. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? commissioners? all in favor? resolution 11-06 has been approved. >> item 11a, requests approval of lease l-14887 with sitting by, doing business as hi dive for an eight-year restaurant is for premises located at pier 28 and a half. >> i'm here to ask your approval of the item read by the commission secretary. in 2002, following the termination of the boondocks,
3:47 pm
run by j. kennedy, the port thought a new restaurant operator through the competitive bidding process. the process concluded in 2003, with sitting by as the highest qualified bidder. this lease was approved by the port commission august 12, 2003. the initial lease provided a term of 9.5 years, with an initial rate based on the greater amount of either the minimum rent, which at the time was $3,389, or 6.5% of gross sales, so the greater amount of the percentage rate was raised to 7%, as was negotiated on the second anniversary date. the initial investment that hi dive put into the premises was about $289,000, and it was completed in 2003. fast forward to 2009, hi dive
3:48 pm
undertook an outdoor seating area, outdoor patio to increase their terms or they're seeking in the restaurant, and the area is about 522 square feet, located on the north side of the restaurant. for the premises currently, it is under a separate license, and rent is paid on a percentage basis. the cost of the construction was $138,000. this value triggers in the court building code. the 100% requirement for upgrades, and therefore, high -- hi dive undertook these upgrades, which were prioritized by our building inspection. the reconstructed the bathroom. there was just -- there was an
3:49 pm
ada bathroom. there was a unisex. they needed to resurface and create a barrier-free path of travel from entry into the restaurant to the outdoor seating area. in addition, they had to receive a permit from the bay conservation development commission for the outdoor seating to allow this, so they installed public seating and trash receptacles. this portion of the upgrade was $154,000, bringing the total investment to $289,000, so this was their second large investment. hi dive, prior to the completion of the improvements, requested a second -- a term extension to help amortized these costs.
3:50 pm
the tool that we have to do this would be under the 1993 retail leasing policy. that would offer a sole source leasing opportunity. we determined that in fact, they do qualify under the policy. they are a tenant in good standing. their lease term expires august 31, 2012. therefore, they do not have enough time left on their lease to amortize the cost. in exchange for the second investment and upon your approval, for its staff is requesting a sole source business opportunity. it will extend the term of the lease for 6.5 years. it will give them 6.5 more years of terms to amortize. aside from the retroactive construction time of three months that we are offering,
3:51 pm
there are no other concessions, and there are substantial reasons why we should continue this lease. they are a proven tenant. they are in the top tier of rent-producing restaurants. if you look at our portfolio per square foot, which is really the indicator you want to look at their, they are in one of the top tiers of that. and they are a very cooperative, excellent tenant. other lease terms, the premises expand to 2459 square feet, which is the addition of the outdoor seating area, silver and is based on that. minimum rent will go up to $5,931, which represents a 50% increase to the base rent. there is a 2% annual adjustment. gross sales are at 7%.
3:52 pm
i think that is it. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. >> ok. >> is there any public comment on this item? all in favor? resolution 11-07 has been approved. item 12, new business. is there any public comment on new business? item 13, public comment. is there any public comment on public comment? congratulations. you have just been appointed to the committee. you are not supposed to say. [laughter] >> hello.
3:53 pm
i'm here wearing a different tack than i usually do. i am a member of the board of directors at the mission creek conservancy, which is a corporation that has been working to fix up mission creek. native planting, while we worked very diligently to persuade the mission bay developer that they really needed to look at the creek as more than just a sewer when they were building mission bay, and i think, from what we see now, and what our neighbors around mission creek tell us, it was a successful project because we have a lot of really beautiful planting around the creek. got some really nice parks. we are building more. and i'm here actually to announced publication of the second addition of -- that
3:54 pm
mission creep conservancy original -- originally had written by nancy olmstead in 1986. because we thought there was a reason to let people know what the real history of mission bay was. it was a 300-acre bay that has been filled in over the years, and we ask nancy if she could update it for us, and unfortunately, her health did not allow it, so we persuaded a historian in the city to do the updates for us. we have expanded the history section are rounded of occupation of mission bay. we have x -- including expansion of the natural history section, and i'm here to give a copy of this new book to the board of san francisco -- the port of
3:55 pm
sanford cisco and let you know we will be having several book events coming up soon, and we hope you can come. thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment? no other public comments, can i have a motion to adjourn? >> so move. second. >> all in favor? meeting adjourned at 4:10 p.m. >> wow.
3:56 pm
>> about four years ago, [inaudible] look at how beautiful this was.
3:57 pm
there is our relationship to the planet. these regions are the wealthiest, the most powerful. that really has impacted the planet. it is almost impossible now to go anywhere and had it really be completely dark. there are very few locations that you can find. that means our relationship to the sky, there is a way where we dominate the sky. we cannot see anything really. we are blinding ourselves in a way. >> you can look at the images,
3:58 pm
they are beautiful. when i started four years ago, there was a conversation about environmental issues that was very different. this is not being talked about in the way it is now. . this has just been like an amazing growth. i anticipate the project to be something that opens a dialogue to public interest in these ideas. so the work is really made to be seen in this environment. it's been show in museum, in gallery, but never in a public setting. and it's kind of ideal for both
3:59 pm
myself and the works to have this real dialogue with the public not only in san francisco but people coming from all over the world. >> since the dawn of electricity, that light is something that people feel connected to and inspired by. personally, there is space to keep that alive, just finding balance. the key is to find some balance.
4:00 pm
4:01 pm
4:02 pm
4:03 pm
4:04 pm
4:05 pm
4:06 pm
4:07 pm