francisco. i appreciate you giving us a hand to bring the cost of this ice down where we do not lose more than we have already lost. it gives us a chance to break even. we have got to have an ice machine in down. >> thank you. -- in town. dan hunt. >> thank you anfor letting me speak this afternoon. i just wanted to emphasize the importance of an ice machine in a harbor. without it, we would not have a working harbor. if i wanted to keep on fishing, i would have to go to another location to get ice for my fishing activities. i just want to stress again how important an ice machine is to a fishing community. without it, you do not have one.

>> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? commissioners? all in favor? aye. the resolution 11-66 is approved. >> item 9b. request approval of second amendment to lease no. l-14282 with the san francisco bar pilots benevolent and protective association amending the rental schedule throughout the term of the lease for space located at pier 9. >> good afternoon, commissioners. port maritime division. the item before you concern of the san francisco bar pilots, who have operated as harbour pilots in san francisco bay since 1835, and have had their headquarters at thier nine since 1989. the bar pilots pharmacies include approximately 19,700 square feet of office, 20,100

square feet of shed, and 14,300 square feet of apron space. the port commission approved lease #l-14282 for the bar pilots in april 2000 a, and subsequently approved the first amendment in december 2009. the bar pilots paid the port $100,000 per month, which equates to $1.2 million in annual rent. the bar pilots are a tendon in good standing with the port. beginning in 2009, the bar pilots have experienced a significant decrease in revenues as a result of fewer ships calling san francisco bay, due to the worldwide economic downturn.

in addition, the lease was negotiated at an extreme high in the real-estate market with projections to go even higher. history proved the exact opposite, however, and the real- estate market, along with the rest of the world economy, went into a deep recession, leaving the bar pilots contract it rental rate much higher than market. under these difficult circumstances, the bar pilots approached the port to request that the least be amended as follows. one, and just the monthly base rent schedule. two, clarify the security deposit amount. 3, amend the five-year market rent adjustment provisions. the current police -- lease rate

language requires the bar pilots to pay a monthly rent of $100 in the first year, increased by 3% per year for the first five years of the lease term. the proposed second amendment would amend the monthly basic rent schedule to eliminate the 3% annual increases, and keep the monthly base rent flat at $100,000 for the entire first five years of the term. the second amendment clarify is the correct amount of the security deposit to be $200,000, which is equal to twice the monthly rent. finally, the current lease allows for the rent to be adjusted to the greater of their greater base rent, or the prevailing market rate.

this provides for an upward only adjustment in the rent. the second amendment would allow the adjustment to be prevailing market rent, which means the rent could go up as well as down, depending on the market. the bar pilots have consistently expressed a willingness to pay fair market rate for its premise seas, which is reasonable. the bar pilots are outstanding partners with the port on virtually all of our maritime operations, including crews and cargo shipping, the use of the pier 70 dry dock for repairs, dredging recommendations, the pier 27 cruise terminal project, and the america's cup, just to name a few. therefore, board staff recommends you approve of the

second amendment to the bar pilots lease #l-14282. this concludes my presentation, commissioners. thank you for your consideration of this item. >> thank you. can i have a motion? >> so moved. >> second. is there any public comment on this item? there is. john cindery. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am the business director for the san francisco bar pilots. first, i would like to thank monique and her staff for what they have done on this amendment. however, i would like to pass on some concern that we have. the bar pilots do everything we can to support the city and port, in their endeavor with the america's cup.

when we signed up for this amendment, we understood that we could be inconvenienced with the america's cup. the amendment is stated, the event may be held on property, including in the immediate vicinity of the premise. last thursday, when we got the staff memo, that language was changed to where it would now be a potential alternative site on the south side, which would cause us a lot of problems moving our pilot boats. we have some concerns about the security on that. we had a meeting right away with peter and like to express our concerns about that.

then on saturday, as you know, headlines about the changes to the super yacht. this article goes into detail on what may happen to appear 9. -- pier 9. and then i see further changes in the staff language, talking about public access to that apron. while we are very grateful for the work that has been done for our changing the rent here, but for any further amendments, we will need to have discussion on that. i want to let you know that we are not pleased about what we are reading, that we may have to move or give up most of our apron. thank you. >> thank you. corrine woods. ok.

veronica sanchez. >> good afternoon. veronica sanchez. we just -- i wanted to thank you on behalf of the captain for the rate accommodation for the bar pilots. the bar pilots are members of our union. certainly, we are very supportive of their work. we also support the request that they have before you now to try to bring some clarity -- what the expectations are going to be for their lease hold and property for the america's cup, with the hope there can be some resolution that it will be in their favor and will not be disrupted. there seems to be a difference

in language between what is in the least and in the staff report and the newspaper. so we are certainly supportive of that. thank you. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? commissioners? >> i was going to ask about the implications on the america's cup, but i think we cover that in staff's report. i did have a technical question. the change would be just the prevailing market rent. is that at the time of renewal? what if the rent goes up and down and it happens to be at a low period and it happens to go back up? are we picking a point in time? how do we adjust to the fact that markets can go up and down, how do we reflect that so we are both fair value? >> deputy director, real estate.

i believe the question is that what times doesn't adjust -- >> i understand after five years it is prevailing market rent, but that particular time, we could have adjustments in the real-estate market that go up and down. by the look of the draw they either get a lower rent or we get a higher rent at the time? >> at the end of five years, there is a market rate adjustment. that is based, basically, on the commission-approved parameter rates for pier 9. the red gets adjusted to our current market rates at that time. for the next five years, there is an escalation of 3% that goes on for five years. then again in five years, it is adjusted for market rate. it could go up, it could go down, but it is what we would be leasing the property on that

given day. >> so we are only agreeing to a fixed rate with no adjustment for the first five years? >> right. >> and when become to the end of that five-year, if the real- estate market goes crazy, we will not recoup that. that will be reflected in the rent, going forward. >> right. >> i guess i am concerned about the timing on the amendment as well. this is clearly a concession on the part of the poort, recognizing market conditions have changed, but there will be a lot of discussion regarding the america's cup. i do not know if there is any incentive, at that point, or those holding these leases, to

want to negotiate. if we're opening up one now, why wouldn't we be working on some provision that, in some sense, obligates them to talk to us? there is no stick, at that point. >> that is a good question. [laughter] that is a policy decision, i think, on your part. >> we would expect -- accept that recommendation. the alternative in the environmental impact report is not new. it has been in there since the draft eir was published. what is new is moving forward with the cdc. based on the comments today, i would suggest that we hold this over. i was surprised by those comments. >> would you please make the

motion, commissioners? [laughter] >> i also have one concern. it is the flat rate for five years, based on the downturn in revenue. the flip side would be, what it years three, four, five, we see an increase? we have locked ourselves into giving significant sums. if there is revenue in excess of a certain amount, can that be taken into account? >> it is not a percentage-range police. it is a rental for office space, shared space. right now, the rental rate is quite high. we do not think in the next five years that we are going to go beyond that. >> without the increases, it would still be -- all right. given the comments that we heard

earlier, in light of the issues surrounding the america's cup, unless there is some reason we need to vote on this today, i would like to move that we defer this item to a future date. >> [inaudible] >> you need to come to the podium to speak. >> please, we would love to hear your comments. >> i just want to point out that we are not talking about five years. we are talking about the three remaining years. we are locked in, as you put it, for the next three years, not five. >> i wish i could say everyone's revenue was going up significantly, which would have made it significant. >> this is our second concession. we did have a long period of time where rates went up dramatically, and as you point out, we were foreclosed from participating on that.

we renegotiated a new lease and this is the second time we have been asked to provide relief. so both parties have been wrong in history. >> but the issue still remains, the withdrawal of this motion to deal with the issues that came up today. >> continuance. >> correct. >> i would like to move that we continue this item and respect -- request staff come back to us with recommendations regarding the america's cup. >> ok, so withdrawn. second? all in favor? aye. any proposed? -- any opposed? >> i just ask that this is brought back to us and staff does further work regarding the america's cup, potential usage

of the southern apron. >> director moyer, i think we all agree that this item needs a bit more work. we've been but to hear it again. -- we would love to hear it again. >> item 10. request approval of a resolution to authorize the executive director to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the arts commission to locate a sculpture of harry bridges in the harry bridges plaza, located between the north and southbound lanes of the embarcadero roadway in front of the ferry building, across from market street. >> good afternoon, commissioners. on july 27, 1999, the port commission adopts a resolution naming the plaza immediately west of the ferry building as harry bridges plaza. the commission's resolution also called for a monument recognizing harry bridges and to direct a project sponsored to

return to this project for approval of the monument design. since then, the committee has selected an artist and developed a design for the monument, as you can see here. harry bridges is widely considered one of america's great labor leaders because of his commitment to labor issues, being at the forefront for racial equality, civil liberties, and world peace, and he played a prominent role in the san francisco general strike, which brought labor issue to the forefront across the country. he also served on this commission from 1970 to 1982. the sculpture will be a bronze, a 12 foot tall likeness of harry bridges. i believe this is a 50% scale model, but we are looking at 81% sculpture -- a 200% sculpture

in real life. the sculpture would stand on top of a square 4 foot tall granite base with embedded text informing visitors of his accomplishments and importance to our waterfront. it would be located in the central area of the plaza, in front of market street, but slightly out of the corridor, as shown here. the location in front of the ferry building, slightly out of the corridor, defined by the market's streakcurbs, free of the primary flow of pedestrians on market street. the sculpture of harry bridges is now before you for consideration along with approval to authorize the port to enter into a memorandum of understanding between the port and san francisco arts commission for the purpose of installing and maintaining the proposed monument for a period of 20 years. the sculpture would be funded by

the committee for harry bridges plaza, would enter into a separate agreement with the arts commission to cover monument installation and maintenance, similar to how other art installations are developed on port property. the mou would allow use of the site without fee. insulation and minutes of the sculpture by the arts commission would be at the cost to the port and the port could require removal of the monument if so desired. if approved, the committee would finalize the fund-raising, have the monument fabricated and named for installation in 2013, presumably in time for the possible america's cup activities. here with us is susan from the arts commission. she can answer questions related to that. we also have a member of the harry bridges plaza committee. >> thank you for this opportunity. this is richard meade, secretary-treasurer of the committee. we are very excited to begin

a fund-raising on this. we have been working on this for a long time. if you have any questions, i will be happy to answer them. >> can i have a motion? is there any public comment on this item? besides corrine woods. is there any public comment on this item? commissioners? questions, comments? >> maybe this is a reflection of the rendering, it looks like the statue is a little further out of the pedestrian thruway. i was wondering why it was not placed all the way past the flow of pedestrian traffic through the crosswalk? >> the shaded area on your

screen right now aligned with market street. your question is would be placed further to the north, which is further away from that? >> i am looking at what i thought was the crosswalk. people would walk straight across the crosswalk. they would block into the statute. >> the general flow -- well, you can see the crosswalk on the west side of the street, as indicated by the pointer there. it is a compromise of trying to locate -- your opinions are certainly value and will come -- the location is a compromise of trying to locate the sculpture in a prominent location in front of the ferry building so what has a relationship to the front and center, yet pushing it to the side so that it does not interfere with the flow of

pedestrians. that balance was trying to be struck. >> it looks to me, if you look at a crosswalk on the left side, large numbers of people moving, i wonder if that impact was taken into account. it may be a moot issue. >> we analyzed it in the field several times and we became comfortable with that at staff level. certainly, willing to take your recommendations. >> i am not suggesting that it should be moved elsewhere, but i wanted to make sure it was not -- high volume -- >that is exactly what i was trying to say, thank you. >> in other words, dead center. >> from a liability standpoint -- thank you.

>> any other comments? >> i just wanted to mention i think it is an attractive statute. i am sure you spend a lot of time on the design. -- spent all lot of time on the design. >> we spent a long time searching for the artist. bruce wolfe, the fellow that we found, is from the bay area. he is nationally recognized for his work on public are. >> thank you. you did a wonderful job. thank you for the gift to the port. all in favor? aye. >> resolution 1157 has been approved. [applause] >> item 10b. request authorization to award, said the -- subject to board of

supervisors approval, a five- year lease for surface parking, especially events and signature between the port of san francisco and china basin ball park company, llc, the pier 48 valley and access from terry francis boulevard in mission rock street. >> the development groups project manager is here before you today to seek approval for an interim, five-year lease for surface parking and special events. in 1997, the port commission authorized a 10 year lease for the development and construction of a new parking lot, part of which had been a warehouse site. the lease was subsequently approved by the board and commenced, just prior to opening

in 1999, april of 2000. in november, 2009, the current lease term expired. the holdover month-to-month status with the board, in april of this year, the port staff issued a letter to the tenants, as allowed by the existing lease hole over language, using the market adjustment as a basis for negotiations, moving forward, staff negotiated terms for a more -- for a better, five-year lease. also, the use of pier 48, on a non-exclusive license basis. 377 is under normal lease terms. expansion into pier 48 and the

roof local license -- revokeable license agreement, getting to monthly base rent, we have broken into two seasons. the high season recognizes 89% of the demand and revenue associated with it, occurring during the baseball season. april through september, three of $55,000 per month. october through month if it through march is $45,000 per month, subject to a increase. reflecting standard parking agreements, 46% of the gross revenue after deducting the tax share. this lease allows for $627,000

by and substantiated, annual costs associated with ball park parking. post-game cleaning and labor associated with the site. extraordinary costs are based on 2011 total costs for these types of offenses. the existing lease, today, authorized the special events and commercial uses. it would expand to shed an and , allowing for support coordination at that site with

maximum revenue generation. we will use marketing expertise to pay rent consistent with the commission of the site, approved every year. at the discretion of the ports special director, requiring additional approval from the port commission. staff report mentioned that threshold a few days ago. >> thank you. promotional space within, if you are familiar with parking lot silage to tell you where your car is, it allows her car to be placed on that.