sfartscommisis

>> please call the meeting to order. captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> [roll call] >> item #2, approval of meeting minutes. item three, public comment and executives session. is there any public comment? seeing none, executive session. >> second. but those in favor? >> aye. >> conference with legal coun>>n

open session. >> all in favor alabama -- all in favor? >> motion to disclose any action taken. >> move that will not disclose any actions taken in closed session. except for item number 41a. >> i would like to disclose for the record that the commission moved to approve the executive director's determination that the convenience of contract # 2742 in the city port's best interest. determination of the contract and settlement of the claim for $5,152.42.

>> all in favor? >> we have already voted. >> thank-you for disclosing. >> item #6, the ringing of cell phones and pagers are prohibited at this meeting. the chair may order the removal from the meeting room and the person responsible for the ringing in use of cell phone, pager, or any similar sound producing device. please be advised that the members of the public have up to three minutes to make public comments on each agenda item unless adopted by a shorter period of any item. >> thank you, welcome, everyone. i am sitting in for monique moyer today. the first thing i would like to do is welcome our new

commissioner, lesley katz. many of you remember her as supervisor katz. so, welcome. the commissioner comes to us with an extensive experience in community planning. as well as government volunteering. she was supervisor from 1996 to 2001. currently she serves as general counsel to champion telecom. she was a board of trustees at the board of sentences to city college. she also assisted the treasure island development authority on planning and related operations for the island.

she holds a jd from the university of california hastings school law. i would also like to welcome whit meloy, a new property manager. he will be managing the fisherman's wharf portfolio. for visual of fact, the planning and development department has issued an rfi for the pierce 70 epic 20 at st. historic building. we are moving forward and looking forward to historic building rehabilitation opportunities. in february the court issued a request for interest in six buildings that generally line 20th street. including the union fireworks

machine shop office building. the port is seeking interested tenants and developers following expression of interest the parties may be invited to submit proposals. responses are due on june 1 of 2011. we would also like to remember the anniversary of the removal of the embarcadero freeway. it has been 20 years. it was on february 27 of 2011. it was built in 1958. in 1986 sam francisco became engaged in heavy debates on whether it should be removed or not. thanks to the 1989 earthquake, the decision was made for us. it has been 20 years. recently the port also

celebrated pier 1 from this building, 10 years. >> making me feel old. >> it flies when you're having fun. the winner of the 33rd america's cup arrived at pier 80 on february 28. it arrived from spain. but in addition, it arrived on the star and it carried 35 containers and a 223 ft wing sail mast. so, the containers and parts of the boat are sitting down at pier 80. operated by metro supports it will serve as the logistical

headquarters for article racing. pier 8 the is the only terminal in california able to handle containers of heavy lift cargo and breakable bulk simultaneously. this was a point of entry for the boat. the port and san francisco, the city, will play host to the 34th america's cup, scheduled to be held in 2013. we would also like to announce the grand opening of the cornelia's restaurant. many of you will remember it as the old world trade club. it is behind us at the end of the pier. it opened last week. the management team is the same management team that managed cornelia by the day. it will be open for lunch,

dinner, and happy hour. it will also be available for banquet rooms and special laments. they feature american continental traditions and dim sum specialties. it is open for drinks seven days a week. they will expand their hours later this month. please pay them a visit. support our newest tenant. public comment is due on the notice of preparation of the eir for pier 7, pier 27 cruise ship terminal 34th america's cup. comments are due by march 11. notice of preparation of an environmental impact report for the 27th cruise terminal america's cup races in northeast clause of has been issued by the planning

department. it was issued on february 9. public comments are due to the planning department. they can be directed to join and she can be reached at 575-9040 or at joy.navarette@sfgov.org. those are again due march 11. we would also like to remind everyone that starting tomorrow is the eighth annual san francisco ocean film festival. there will be 50 films running over five days. you can go on to their website and look at all of the details for the different films and activities. happening in conjunction with the festival.

finally, sunday streets are back. the first is going to be march 20. it will run along the embarcadero. so, come down and enjoy all of the activities. this is the second year of the sunday streets. it seems to be growing in popularity. hopefully below have good weather. anyone can come down to enjoy the embarcadero. it will run from fisherman's wharf to mission bay. i hope everyone comes down and enjoys it. that concludes the executive director's report. >> i would like to welcome the commissioner. we are so happy that she is here. >> looking forward to being here. >> i second the motion. >> any public comment on the executive director's report?

>> item from the consent calendar, approval of the annual update of the ports plan for fiscal year 2012-21. approval of consent between gold street has seen as a four year term to operate a ticket booth and office space totaling 700 square feet at pier 41 at pier 50. >> so moved. >> is there any public comment? resolution 11-12 and 11-13 has been approved. >> item 9a, request approval for first amendment to lease l 14829 with boston clinton

general contractors corp., to change the cut -- commencement date and eliminate the funding guarantee requirements for construction of the initial tenant improvements. >> i am a property manager for the port of san francisco and i am here for approval for the amendment to lease with dawson clinton general contractors. they are currently a tenant of the port that occupies space at pier 50. they currently occupy 1600 square feet of shed space. they have occupied this premise since february 12, 2010, after moving at the port request to make room for the mission bay shore protection project. in august of 2010 the pork entered into a second lease for additional premises at pier 50 shed b with office space

combined. the lease requires the tenant to construct additional improvements by in the amount of $191,000 for which the attendant receives rent credits over a 60 month term. initial payments are required to be guaranteed by contractors bond by in the amount equal to 150% of the construction cost of the initial tenant improvements. police also provide for the initial lease construction. since it commences on august 1, 2010, and the tenant was having trouble carrying the required bonds and guarantees, the tenants delayed taking possession of the premises. the tenant is a small business of san francisco and did not have the collateral as days --

as a business for the cost of the initial tenant improvements, which would have been $600,000 in bond guarantees. had they not been the general contractors for this project, it would have had to hire a general contractor. in that case the actual contractor would have had the requirement and not the tenant. the port feels that there is little risk in having the tenant as a general contractor. so, the pork and the tenant desire to retroactively amend the lease to march 15, 2011, eliminating guaranteed requirements for improvement based on the following reasons. the tenant shot at out for the purpose of constructing tenant improvements and shout at all times during construction maintained kermit licenses and

bonding requirements with government contractors. the tenant shall fulfill the obligation as a contractor and maintain builder's risk insurance, which also covers the port. the tenant shall provide the port with released documents for each subcontractor that works on the initial tenant improvement. in addition, the premises in question is currently vacant been shell, with utilities base, require improvements before occupancy. there is little risk that any actions by the tenant could cause additional damage to the premises. the tenant is a contractor that is highly motivated to complete the project in an efficient and timely manner as it becomes the new office space. standing to the port commission policy. the commencement date of the lease amendment will be determined upon the approval of the lease and the file execution

of march 15, anticipated. staff request approval to enter into the first amendment with general contractors for the premises located at pier 50. >> so moved. >> second. >> questions or comments? any public comment on this item? resolution 1114 has been moved. but item -- >> 9b, request approval of the port of san francisco's proposed 2011 retail leasing policy. >> commissioners. and welcome to your first meeting. court staff presented this item as an informational item in the fall.

with the forbearance of the chair and the vice chair, i would like to present substantially the same presentation for the new commissioners. this has been an area of some policy discussion with the board of supervisors and their budget analyst. typically, what happened in the past was that support staff have been approached by retail tenants of the port who are doing well forming business along the waterfront and propose consistencies current with retail leasing properties for port property. when those leases require a board of supervisors approval, it happens when the lease term is more than 10 years or generates revenue of more than $1 million.

the response of the budget analyst has been why did you not competitively bid this opportunity? to give you a bit of background before we get into the presentation, ports that had to think about that. retail opportunities are not widely available on the waterfront. new retail leasing opportunities, there are plenty of retail operators in the city that would like an opportunity to do business on the waterfront. we certainly know that we want to keep our good tenants. but a policy that affords direct negotiation with tenants should balance the need for new market entrants to be able to do business on the waterfront. so, with it that in mind, we looked at the old policy. i really want to credit susans

staff. we worked very closely with the city attorney's office. we tried to weigh the issues that the budget analysts were speaking to us about. so, i am just going to get into the presentation. if you have any questions, i would be happy to answer them. so, the existing policy was adopted in 1993 by the port commission. it establishes a requirement to competitively bid opportunities. support staff has taken advantage of that direct negotiation exception on multiple occasions. in 2010 we had an example following the current policy.

ports that have done an excellent job negotiating substantial capital improvements to locations like pier 47 and of the java house. and managed to increase the base rent for those least amendments quite substantially. you will take note that with our retail leases, we typically have a grant structure that is the base rent plus a percentage. often what we are doing is we have a lot of percentage for the sites. we will use the history of rent at the side with the expected new revenues. so, the proposed policy tries to line port policy with administrative code. administrative code section

2.6-one. that applies to port property. they are the board of supervisors. they requested competitive bidding on this type of lease transaction except where the board of supervisors were impractical or impossible. in this policy we are generally recommending that we rely on the word of practical. if we have a tenant that is performing well and proposing major improvements on the property, it would be practical and not likely to get a better result for the bidding process. so, we would follow a formal -- for new riyad -- retail leasing opportunities it would be a form of formal competitive bidding. a request for proposal and

qualifications. if we sought to take advantage of the direct negotiation exception, ports that would compete first to enter permission for direct negotiations. we would not do that until we had determined that the existing tenant was in good standing and was the most suitable economic and for the site with a reviewed business plan and audited financial business statements for the tenant. all of that due diligence work would come first. so, we will evaluate the tenants proposal on a case by case basis based on proposed improvements and capital costs. we are not talking about any investments for the tenant. generally speaking, improvements to the interior would not be allowable. instead we would be looking at

substructure improvements. improvements to the shell of the facility. those are typically the kinds of improvements that would be triggered by an a new lease upgrade to utilities and the like. or improvement to surrounding areas of the property. for instance, they could impose a new public access requirement that would be a basis for some of those capital improvements. we would ask the tenants to quantify their capital improvement as a percentage of leasehold value. court staff would recommend the finding and the tenant would have to demonstrate financial capacity. speaking broadly, we would be looking to adopt it plans.

to make sure that the retail use made sense at that location. he would consider recommending renewals under the following circumstances -- we just had a really bad commercial real estate downturn. our suggestion is that for the next three to five years we were not in that kind of economic downturn and it made sense to keep the tenants that you have rather than to propose kicking them out. that would be extraordinary circumstances where we would forgo competitive bidding. and as i think i have described, for a term of 10 years or greater where we propose capital improvements in good standing, they have supplied a good business plans with revenue history over the

past three years that exceeds the average, this is one way in which this proposed policy differs from the existing retail leasing policy and we are actually including proposals standards that the report receives. for a term of up to five years we requested interest in the site and it received no expressions of interest. two findings would be recommended subsequently to the board of supervisors to serve the public purpose. the leases would all be subject to standard, commission approved requirements. so, that is the end of the slide show. request of the commission we presented the proposed policy to

that group. we received no substantive input to the policy. that is where we have most of our tenants, retail tenants that would be affected. next we would propose that if they decide to adopt the policy, that it be brought to the board of supervisors and they would seek a hearing at the budget policy finance meeting. the goal would be to have the board of supervisors in some way, by resolution or the budget analyst, suggests that this policy conforms to the administrative code so that budget analysts view lease extensions and have an easier pass through the board of supervisors. if you have other questions, i would be happy to answer them. >> is there any public comment?

commissioner? >> referring to 2010, i think the resolution refers to 2011. >> thank you for finding that error. it should be referring to 2011. >> i think that that is how it is in the resolution. >> any other resolutions or comments? everyone in favor? the resolution is approved. >> item #10. new business. any public comment on new business? commissioners, any items that you would like to add to new business? item 11, public comment. >> is there any public comment on public comment? seeing no one, we have a motion to adjourn. >> i would also like to offer the commission's best wishes moyer and her family for

recovery. with that, i motion of adjournment. >> seconded. >> meeting adjourned at 3:50 p.m.. >> thank you.