port facilities. 8 d., request authorization to amend the professional services contract with an arm of the sciences associates for environmental review services for pier 27 james herman cruise terminal and northeast wharf plaza by increasing the amount of the contract from $851,000 to an amount not to exceed $2.7 million and expanding the scope of services to include in farming or reduce services and permit coordination for the 34th america's cup. it8 e., request approval to shore request for proposals soliciting public relations and media services related to the port's special events and other revenue generating and strategic media activities. 8 f., authorization to enter into a letter of agreement between the bay area urban area security initiative and the port of san francisco for the distribution of fiscal year 2009 urban area security initiative regional grant funds. 8 g., request authorization to

advertise a request for proposals to solicit consulting services to develop a waterborne all-hazard response plan for the san francisco bay region. commissioners, with regard to item 8 a and c. the date should be changed from a 24 to may 20, and the resolution number should be changed. >> i had some questions. >> consent items, if there is discussion, it should be rejected-- >> ok, move them from the consent, there? >> yes.

that uh, like to move some items of the consent calendar. 8 c., 8 e. more specifically, those two. >> with that, madam chair, i will move that consent calendar items 8 a., b., d., f., and g. >> any public comment? >> all of those in favor? those resolutions are passed. >> item 8 c., request authorization to advertise a request for proposal soliciting professional and sharing services to establish a building occupancy resumption program for

critical port facilities. >> sorry, as the new commissioner, i will ask some questions. it is more informational. i guess part of it is that this looked like it was developing agency plan in the event of some emergency facilities. in addition to what we're trying to do going forward, what are some of the existing currency plans in place in the event there is a relatively long time line before this gets implemented? what is in place now? to protect? >> ok, we have a representative from the engineering division. right now, the building occupancy resumption plan only applies to the private sector. i think only one of our master tenants has officially signed up, and two major tenants are looking at it. the plan is the same as everyone else's, which is in the event of

an event, earthquake or something else, that renders a facility closed, then we have to go one by one out to inspect each individual facility. we have sought federal funding to allow us to get an engineer to create a plan for us so we could quickly resume at some of our key piers. we will not be able to do all of those with this funding. maybe you want to elaborate? >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am the senior civil engineer. at this moment, so far we only have two facilities that are part of this program. one is the ferry building, only the building apart, but not the substructure, and the second facility that we were able to bring into this program was

general 7 abc station, which is on the sea wall side. what we have right now is we have provided all the port facilities into three categories. we call category one at a high priority facilities, which is pier 1. >> need to articulate that is? >> department dealt particulate -- department of facility. we work with the emergency center to give them updates on what is happening at the ports. pier 1 is doc at the moment, and we have also designated pier 50 a critical facility. when something happens, port

needs to help start helping with inspections and removing debris and other items as needed. so, we have limited qualified staff to do these inspections. " we will be doing first, if something happens, we will be inspecting all of the critical facilities first. once we're done with the critical facilities, will be moving onto priority to facilities -- priority two facilities, which are in densely populated areas. priority three facilities, which are not as much high importance, not in densely populated areas. we have only maybe 10 qualified staff to do these inspections,

and we have 3 koehler coatings. one means it is green, which is safe to occupy. the other means it has restrictions. red means the facility is not suitable for occupancy. so only people with certain qualifications and certifications are allowed to do the stabbings. -- are allowed to do these taggings. ewe have 39 piers, but if you include all the substructures and buildings, we have close to 100 facilities. even inspecting the critical facilities, it will take days, because we have to send people out in the boats, to inspect the pilings underneath, and then

let's take for example the ferry building. although we have the building component, we do not have the substructure component. >> the intent of my question -- i just wanted to understand the completion of the timeline of this if it is extend it. i was not sure reading the material with the existing plan was, and allow it to be sure there was a plan. i understand the resources may be limited and may not be as well as what you would like, and this new plan may give you a better road map. i just went to make sure that anything did happen between now and the completion of the new plan we do have a plan. >> we do have a plan in place, but we have limited resources. we may not be able to do everything we want to do in the short time. that is why we're trying to bring private industry on board, and they will be on-call. if something happens, we give them the phone call and they

show up right away, within less than 24 hours. it would be supplementing the port staff. we will be doing inspections. >> that is the interim plan? >> desperatyes. >> that was the intent of my question, thank you. and any public comment on 8c? is there a motion? >> i move that we pass as amended. >> said. -- second. >> all those in favor? all opposed? 8c passes. >> 8e, request approval to issue request for proposal soliciting public relations and media services related to the port's special events and other revenue generating and strategic media activities. >> again, as the new commissioner, i wanted to get a better sense of the background.

i guess my question, number 1, in terms of the various, it is pork-specific and the other offenses that are more sort it -- are port-specific and the other events that are more a city-wide. in terms of the amount that was determined, the limit, 600,000. in my experience, if you use 200,000 and end up on a monthly retainer, something like 600 and month, there are three major areas to cover, i am not a public relations expert, but i don't think that covers very much. i am concerned, how is the amount determined? now that you want to cover three major areas discussed in the

resolution, will that be sufficient to do what you hope to do? >> i will start, and then renee who is our public information officer will respond. traditionally, public-sector departments of the city do not have media advisers. this is a new concept for the port, given all of the work that we have going on. as of right now, we traditionally do or marketing and public relations and house, it in close coordination with the rest of the city family. in fact, ms. martin was asked and participated in the media event related to the memorial for the firefighters last week, stationed at the service all day. we typically work very much hand in hand. we found when we had that the

emergency operation center that was stood up more than two weeks, while there are a number of public information officer staff to the city, only three, counting renee, were willing to staff that. that is one of the things we'd like to have it in the event there is a sizable emergency. renee is one person to back fill that. we don't have a plan for that right now. likewise, with the america's cup, listed as an event. it the event authority has their own pr people. the city has been working very much with all of the affected departments, but we thought it might be useful as we move forward with our obligations to have somebody on call to do that. we're not looking to have a retainer. we are looking to have specific on-call services from time to time, and we hope that it is enough, but we have never done this before.

>> but as the director state id this would be on an as needed basis. we're hopeful that it would be a contract to the private sector. >> as this relates to the america's cup, is there an overall public relations media

plan that the port would be a component of? in addition to these other areas, the 150th anniversary, and whatever other unforeseeable things, i am not debating that you need to have these resources and help. i have a stand there's a lot of pressure, but it is just -- i am just wondering how the $600,000 is estimated. if i boiled it down in a typical way, it did not seem like it was that much if you were looking for three teams of people. that does not go very far in of p.r. world. >> you are right, but that is the amount that we came up with, as well as the america's cup. >> ok, america's cup is going to put up? >> i believe about 50%.

let me back up. what we're trying to create is an as needed pool, which is where we have on standby selected consultants to do work as it occurs. let's say that the port decided that we needed some sort of special public advisory regarding traffic conditions, the day of the race. then we would take from the pool, we will look to the funding we expect, three in the pool. we would not do that without coordinating. wheat for doing it as a good to see.

>> it is more or less a contingency number, but not based on some -- >> it may help, what was the value of the contract for the pier 70 solicitation? >> that was about $10,000 over three months. >> this is all really very new to us. i apologize i cannot draw the picture, but we did retain the services of the pr firm to help us. for the pier 70 contract. it was a very discreet task, and to answer your question, that is based off of that experience and something similar to that. i think your point is well

taken. >> my experience is there has to be some sort of went up for them to understand and maintenance, and addition to be about to respond to the special circumstances. >> it is not a large sum of money for all of the work we have between now and then. bu>> having been on both sides f this process, and that many of the contracts, many of the contractors recognize public agencies did not have the same kind of funding as the private sector, and they recognize that in their response.

it does not go as far as many of the responders would recognize. >> my only point today, is this going to be sufficient funding. i think it is good to try to work these issues through. >> and it was a big stretch for us to come up with that much money. i will say for your benefit and the public's, if it proved to be too little and we are able to find other funding, what we do

is come back to the commission to augment the approval and would go back to the civil service commission, which has the authority to say this is work that can be contracted out or not. they did that at their meeting a week ago. we would come back through the process and see if we could amend the contract if we really need to. >> it seems to me, i imagine, the america's cup will be doing a lot of work in this area, so hopefully we coordinate with them on much of that. it will ideally save us from having to spend too much. >> right, and that is their preference, but there are some port issues. that is why we wanted it. >> thank you for your support. >> any other questions? is there any other public comment on item 8e.

is there emotion? all those in favor? resolution 11-41 is approved. >> item 9 a., informational presentation of the proposed fiscal year 2011-2012 monthly rental rate schedule, monthly parking stall rates, and special event and filming rates. >> i am here to give a brief presentation on the fiscal year 2011, 2012 monthly rental rates, the monthly parking stall rates, and the special event and filming rates. in 1993, the commission delegated authority to the detective director to negotiate -- to the executive director to negotiate agreements within certain business parameters. first, the agreements must be consistent with the minimum rental parameter.

it cannot be longer than five years, staff to negotiate one month early. port staff provides this commission with a monthly report on the leases executed under this policy. under this policy, from june 30, 2010, until may, we have negotiated 70 agreements worth about $3.4 million annualized. it provides for an annual update of the minimum parameters. as we all know, the office market in san francisco has stabilized somewhat. the rent staff increased. hopefully, there will be a modest increase through 2011.

demand for property on the waterfront has been good. however, we have experienced some vacancy at all piers. we have a consolidation and a tenet termination. we have some higher than normal vacancy rates. the overall vacancy rate is 17%. at citywide, it is 14.5%. regarding industrial and warehouse space, which includes pier shed and land rights, san francisco represents 12% of the total bay area warehouse and industrial market. the industrial market stood in san francisco at 5.5%. the correct port vacancy rate is 6.6%, which is much better than it was last year, and 11%.

we have managed to attract a lot of tenants in that area. following a review of the commercially available data, staff has made recommendations to make some changes. some of the changes, reducing the rates at pier 9 office from 250 to 195. and we have included a submerged land rate, which we have not had, which we traditionally charge for, and now we will codify, memorialize the right so we can track it. regarding parking, the number of parking lots, most of our parking is done through a concession lease. however, we maintained it 357 individual parking stalls.

they help us maintain office vacancy rates. that market has somewhat stabilized. it is flat, as is the office market, so we're not proposing any changes in the parking rate. we have done exhaustive studies, you have seen the staff reports, so i think everybody is comfortable there. the income to the port is about $390,000. these two areas of business, we contract with a third party, a consultant, and they seem to agree with our conclusions. filming and special events, that continues to be a popular place, sunday streets, filming, major productions. we just had an hbo production, "hemingway."

and then there are subsets of events that we have traditionally come to the commission on an adhoc basis to ask for a fee waiver or reduction. what we would do is like to ask for the reduction and waiver, the proposed fee waiver for flight week, and the america's cup, the world series, and the christmas tree lot. the small business line last year, the special events and filming at about $169,000 annualized. i would be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> i seem to be the one with all the questions. i guess being the new kid on the block.

i know there are some minor adjustments in terms of reductions, and i just wanted to know if you held to the correct rates, would you really lose tenants? >> we may not lose existing tenants, but new tenants, it gives us better ability to negotiate. what you are delegating, really, it is this range, the bottom and the suggested top. we always try to get as much as we can. i know commissioner lazarus had this exact question last year, and we were able to get the as nchor tennant at pier 9 because we reduced the rate. so it does make a difference. >> in terms of when we look at

the categories, you have class b fees, i am not sure how relevant, but given the location of this, location, location, location and real-estate, the fact that the building may be a certain class, but the other factors in terms of the view and others being considered. i guess when we talk to prospective tenants in terms of their alternatives, i would think somewhere house, at it is not as easy in the south bay. if you need warehouse space, you need it warehouse space, at a premium. all i am asking is hopefully to maximize what we can do in terms of office space. i know you are thinking of that as well. given the market is beginning to stabilize, whether we think there is more blessed to city these days than last year.

-- whether there is more to last at -- more elasticity. >> a lot of the property week least triple net. i was surprised when it went from net to gross, from full- service to net, now they're saving seventy-five cents. if you were to run it off at pier 9 and you pay to 50 per square foot, the rent increases to about 3.25 per square foot. we do get a value added because of the location. it may be on the waterfront, on the embarcadero, there is a lot of historic value, the fun factor, a lot of things. but that is a very good ipoint. >> any other questions? >> the anomaly on pier 80, it

should be decreased their as opposed to the other parking stalls? >> those rates, which i did, the higher rates really reflect the parking. we have a side business in truck parking. very few places in the city you can park 16 wheeler's. it is really more of a correction in pier 80. the average tenants are about $1.25 per square foot. that is a matter of controlling the lot. we believe if you are paying $1.25 per square foot, $185 for a parking space may be part of it is to keep that business in the city. we think $40 is more in line with the market. whereas, by way of example, pier 9