that long term lease model, there would be presumably some revenues at the port would likely use to subsidize other improvements, for example, pier 70, those would have to be deposited in the port harbor fund. >> any other questions or comments? thank you. that was a wonderful presentation we can tell a lot have gone into this. we are happy to do is what within the same property, which is rare. just for clarification, seawall lot 330, we will remain in -- retain the watermark condominium site? >> no, that was part of a similar, prior package associate with the cruise terminal bill. we did a swap in that case.

that was an equal value swap. the trust was impressed on portions of thewp site in exchange for that half acre. >> the remaining site would be transferred? >> exactly. >> thank you. >> items on the consent calendar. request authorization to award construction contract #2752 north a prepare project to suv construction management inc. doing business management company in an amount not to exceed $786,000, and also authorized have to increase the contract amount by 10% in the event of unanticipated contingencies through contract modification or change order for a total of $864,000. 5 b, request authorization to apply for, except, and expend a

grant or $5 million from the state of california prop. 84 statewide park development and community revitalization program of 2008 for the northeast north plaza open space, located on pier 27 at the embarcadero promenade across from lombard street. five c p request authorization to advertise a request for quote -- qualifications soliciting as needed real estate economics and related professional services. 5 d except the port's annual report on contra connectivity for fiscal year 2010-2011. >> so move. second. >> any public comment on the consent calendar? commissioners? all in favor? the resolution 1151, 1152, and 1153 , along with the port

annual report have been approved. >> on 5b, i would like to commend staff for uncovering a substantial amount of money. from what i understand, they had to work with other city agencies to get the party to go for this. it would be fabulous if it comes through. again, kudos on the creativity and finding the opportunity. >> bigger and better. >> 6a. request adoption of the california environmental quality act findings and mitigation, monterey, an error reporting program for and approval of brandon street wharf public open space project. >> good morning, commissioners.

hobbesian this morning, we are here to request the adoption of the california environmental quality act findings and mitigation, my turn, and reporting program for an approval of the brenda street wharf public space open project. i will provide a better product history, describe the features of the project, introduced the project team, and then die and will speak about the environmental documents. the ministry fourth to be located on the embarcadero, not between piers 30/32 and 38 will be a new $7 a square foot public space parallel to the embarcadero promenade. the work will define the center of the south beach neighborhood. for a better product history, in the year of 2000, the san francisco bay conservation and development commission all working with the port amended their special area plans for the

san francisco waterfront. changes made to this plan and in the port's waterfront land use plan remove a longstanding bcdc 50% rule which effectively prevented the redevelopment of many of the historic sheds. with the adoption of these documents, projects such as the exploratory more able to move forward. as part of the negotiations for this, the court agreed to construct two as a given space as eleanor the waterfront. the northeast were plaza, which is the new public space proposed by the area in front of the cruise terminal, and thebrannon street wharf. these spaces are both described in detail in size and of the uses and the port agreed to build the space is within a 20- year period from the time the plan was adopted. to implement this, the port began in 2001 working with some of the members -- i see a couple

of them in the room today. working with bcdc and a 20- member citizen advisory committee. the cac included citizen groups, residents, merchants, and a furry of groups representing a broad mix of regional and local viewpoint. the port conducted seven meetings and three public workshops. the cause of design was reviewed at joint meetings by bcdc review board and the port's waterfront advisory committee three times. the design was concluded on december 9, 2002, andaugust 12,t commission approved the concept design. the concept design was again reviewed on july 6 and september 14, 2009, becoming the basis for the project described in the environmental analysis, located in the south beach waterfront.

this is an image of the original concept design that was put forward in 2002. the wharf will be a new open space, connected to the prominent on the south edge of 32. an area that is currently characterized by dilapidated and failing whorf sections. the new war will have a light shade, adding a 10. section in widening to about 140 feet at the south and the pier 36. the major project components are too rigid include a major neighborhood green. think of it as a new waterfront commons for the south beach area.

two, afloat for small craft. third, interpretive elements that interact with and described the bay environment. the project will demolish the condemned pure 36, including the war between piers 32 m 38. as discussed in the environmental document. constructing a concrete support of war for along the length of the embarcadero. to look at how the wharf will be used, expecting tables and benches, the area is the plaza, with interpretive elements in it. you can see the large, neighborhood green, an unscripted space for whatever you might want to do, as long as you do not throw a ball too far. the design remembers its san

francisco waterfront history by taking on the shape of pier 36. it juts out a little bit. there is the use of architectural fabric that i will describe in a moment. mostly flat, with long, contain, based planters of 18 churches in height. the open nature of the side is oriented to the bay and the adjacent neighborhood. this is the railing on the outside. it has a full, tight bass, made from concrete, intended to add one more foot of wave protection. also, the entire war angles slightly up from the, not to take those considerations in. as far as the sturdiness of materials, we have reduced maintenance costs going forward. another view of the problem of section along the waterfront,

back toward the bay bridge, here is the portal for 30-36. we are proposing to be used the posts and crosse numbers of material, consistent with how it is used now. also, pier 36 was taken off of the shed a couple of years ago. it will be reconstructed with lighting. we will be using several elements from the existing pier to get down to the public's low. in the plaza, where we are proposing to construct three title columns, as we call them, they will operate together. not that different heights, but there are giant plungers that go up and down with a height of the day.

they are marked in 1 foot increments, to inform people driving by, walking on the promise not, what the height of the tide is. in the middle, three and a half. on the far right, the maximum tied tight. fitting the third category of interpretive elements about the bay. also, on the south and of the site, 52.5 feet long, following a timeline, talking about the history that occurred on the site. a tidal marsh that appalled and emphasizes the chinese immigration that occurred on this site, as relegated from the warehouse nearby. also, going to some of the sites, important labor history that occurred on this site in

the 1984 strike. sustainable design and construction, although it will not be certified as we do of certified public spaces just yet, we are looking at public space guidelines to evaluate how we do construction, reuse and construction materials, putting recycle materials in, and most importantly, in the concrete, a very water efficient irrigation system with planting materials. also, designing what is not on here, most importantly, all long life span. not just a site that will be a marginal use. i do not have the exact dates. stephen can provide them. they will have a longevity to them. it will be able to withstand a

significant amount of urban use. some of the site furnishings are intended so that the site always faces the bay. the war can also be described as a collection of projects. the first is the demolition of pier 36, to be done by the army corps of engineers with a majority of funding being federal. they did administer a demolition contract scheduled for january of 2012, to be completed in may. at the commission's next meeting, september, staff will return. steven will be requesting authorization to advertise the major elements not originally anticipated for the area, including the strengthening of the sea wall along the length of the project, with reconstruction

supported along the from another, where the sea wall goes to the curved edge of the roadway. you do not realize that you are in a pile supported structure. when the demolition is completed, the court will begin construction with expectations for completion by the end of 2016, in time for the america's cup. funding will be provided in greater detail at your next meeting. construction tasks originally anticipated over that section of, not bring the total costs to around $29 million, $3 million greater than the current develop funds. at the next meeting we will present alternates and options for how the project may proceed with available funds. i just want to introduce some of the project participants.

steven is the project engineer. i do not see them in the room right now. a historic architect for that project, having worked substantially with the ir. and looking at the environmental document, there are many others. the army corps of engineers is here today. there are many others who have been involved in the project. thank you. >> good morning, president, members of the commission. i think that dan did an excellent overview on the project. it is a long coming project. we have had to get over a number

of bumps in the road. it is very significant to be here, as the project itself was conceived of as being an open space that would be the lever -- delivered as part of the redevelopment of pier 32. as we reported, we ran into problems with that development. i would specifically like to recognize career in woods and michael sweet as being key people, from the very beginning, locking us through the long history. through the different partnerships with public agencies as well as the community at large, we were able to force iraq and get over the requirements up to this point. included within that was this full environmental impact report analysis. as part of the grant street pier project, part of the

redevelopment of pier 30-32, you can see the water mark condominiums that we were talking about earlier. at that time, we thought we had a good understanding of what the historic resources had been. but it was not identified as a historic resources and was not analyzed in that fashion. subsequent to that, when we were actually doing the detailed analysis for the embarcadero historic district, that is when our historian at the time identified of the source, triggering the need for subsequent environmental review. it was only through the patience of the community of partners that we were able to pull together funding from alternate sources that ultimately led us to our partnership. producing this environmental impact report before you today. in coordination with the

environmental national policy act document, the army corps needs to prepare to do their portion of the work for the demolition of pier 36. the combination of federal, local, and state approval, coalesced to be able for the project to move forward. in that context, this has been completed. the planning department was also a major partner in helping us without having to hire consultants on that. it has been finalized and certified by the planning commission. at this point, the commission, which i understand you have all received copies of that, the summary is written up in the findings that are attached to the proposed resolution that staff is recommending to approve today. summarizing the findings of that

eir, acknowledging that the ballot -- demolition of a war of section will be effectively replaced and are significant in environmental impact in terms of demolition. as reflected in dance presentation, all of the work going into to deliver a public open space for south beach are bigger reasons to override the fact that even the we have significant environmental impact, the public open space benefits, the benefits to the day, the basis upon which you would be approving the findings. in association with that, there are a number of mitigation that the that are memorialized and attached to the staff report

resolution, set with the dictates of which to be a part of the construction of the project and implementation of labor history and the more realization of some of the physical gateways to pier 36. so, with that, hopefully that will give you a good picture of the overall history. we recommend that you approve the attached resolution. thank you. >> moved. >> second. >> we do have public comment. maryland? >> good morning, everyone. i am a member of the south beachgac and have been involved

in this project for several years. this is a great report. a good way to continue on from the ferry building, all of the way down through the bay bridge, all of the way to the ballpark. i definitely support this and look forward to having its completion in a couple of years. thank you. let's thank you. commissioner? -- >> thank-you. commissioner? >> good morning, commissioners. this is very exciting for us. i was the chair of the south beach cac redevelopment. i have been involved in this project since its inception. i am excited to see it before you. we hit some bumps in the road,

but i would like to commend staff that worked so hard to bring this forward. i would like to thank staff for pushing this bond measure on to the ballot a couple of years ago. i feel like we are almost there. i would encourage you to adopt a resolution to do what is necessary to move this project forward. hopefully, we will be able to complete this project in time for the america's cup, with that the desired end needed green space and beautiful elements added to the south beach communities for a long time coming. it will be appreciated. it is looking great. i am excited that we are at this point now. thank you very much. >> are there any other public comments? commissioner? >> i support the resolution. i wanted to speak to staff about

the next steps, since there were many comments about historical preservation. will there be challenges as we continue forward? what is the next step in the process? >> good question. i was remiss in not recommend -- recognizing the preservation community as well. at the time that the special policies were put in place, the preservation community was also a part of that process. at that time, there had been a survey of the historic peers. pier 36 was accepted as not being one of them. one of the reasons that this was identified as a good location to create a major open space. despite subsequent new information about historic status, there may be members within the community that still have some concerns and heartburn around the issue.

by and large, they have been committed to trying to work with the overall community objectives. they have been very cooperative. the historic preservation commission commented as well. so, everyone has been fully appraised of this project moving forward. >> with our commission, with planning commission approval, what other approval is necessary? >> that is going to be the construction process that steve will be bringing forward to you at the next meeting. this is the port commission, basically saying that they approved to go ahead because the implication steps in the process would work that needs to be done with that the army to coordinate the demolition of pure 36 will be construction of the plaza itself. there is a lot of technical detail that needs to be

coordinated between those efforts. it has been under way, but with action today we would be able to pull through and meet that schedule for delivering in time for next summer. thank you. >> it might be premature to ask about this. it might be something for the army corps, but i have a question about the existing tiles that are there. in terms of the reduction of the significant impacts, it seems that a lot of it relates to driving. are there any opportunities to preserve what exists, as much as what is being done at the exploreatorium? >> great question. during the detailed engineering design, we looked at several

methods to incorporate into the new project that turned out to be more expensive. we went forward with removal and driving piles for construction, which worked. the actual files, the zone that overlaps with new construction, is fairly small. but we did consider that. >> thank you. any other questions? >> thank you. this is a very long awaited project. i would like to thank dan, the in, and all of the staff that work along with michael, karan, and all of the committee advisory groups that have been involved. we cannot wait until we have groundbreaking and construction. thank you all very much. let's all in favor?

>> 1154 has been approved -- >> all in favor? >> 1154 has been approved. >> is there any public comment on new business? i would like to acknowledge the port delegates to the annual association of the annual meeting. >> ok. item #eight. public comment. >> is there any public comment? >> item #9, executive session. >> so moved. >> all in favor? executive session. >> conference with real council and real property negotiated.

>> i can keep that? we are reconvening be open section. with that we not disclose any of the items discussed in closed session. >> second. >> can i have a motion to adjourn? >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> we are adjourned at 11:22 p.m.? >> a.m. [laughter] >> i was nodding, as to why it -- so i do not know what mike -- [no audio]