working in the neighborhood for years. $250 million in development being worked on or that has been completed. we also have a great common vision for what can happen. we bring some great users in the form of stimulating new incubators, obscura, and burning man. to create a vision, it is critical we have a partnership between the developers and the port and surrounding neighbors. that will combine local knowledge with technical expertise on how to finance the projects. a partnership that values the creativity necessary for innovation will set the stage for the rebirth of this area. we look forward to building that partnership with the port. thank you for the opportunity

this morning. >> thank you. i also want to point out to the commission and community that some proposals have been made public that have a lot more in the men can be said in five minutes. those are on the website. we will also have expanded versions on the pier 70 website. what is in your packet is fine. there was one glitch on the website. it was a printing mistake. horton development is the third team. marcy wong will be starting off for them.

>> it is an exhilarating process to be involved in the port development team on pier 70. this has many parallels to another project. before it became a hoping ruin -- hulkin -- these snapshots illustrate division come to life. odi is singularly qualified for pier 70. it has a tremendous track record. 50 million square feet, 15 build projects, a huge campuses on

formally polluted sites. odi is self-financed on the equity side and receives preferential rate financing. critical to its reliability as a developer, it has a proven record as a 30-year entity and not an untested consortium. because of the experience and understanding of this type and scope of rehabilitation, orten sees opportunities for innovative solutions. >> allow me to introduce marcy wong and don logan. she is an architect and professor of architecture at the university of berkeley. allow me to give you a tour.

the awards include the national honor award from the aia. the awards are impressive but they're not the reason odi chose her firm. a fairly steady the site for the national park service. -- they thoroughly study the site for the national park service. she is not one to rest on laurels. she is all about what is next. the most important we chose her is her skill and design. she is an architect and engineer. that intersection of knowledge is very important to this project. most compellingly, her genius for envisioning productive and elegance bases -- spaces. that is why she has earned the nickname around odi of "

michelangelo and won." >> i will speak briefly about the concept for pier 70. the proposal is based on the new american workplace. incorporates multiple functions under one roof. our tenants have the combination of office, r&d, manufacturing, warehousing, chevron, and retail activities in one space. odi design also incorporate shared amenities, classrooms, transportation, restaurants, and performing arts centers. recent tenants in other projects in the bay area with the same model include

bittersweet cafe, odwalla, oaklandish, mellon hardware -- mountain hardware, sun power. i want to speak further on our approach of putting together a legal team for the project. odi glenn rates with contractors locally. our projects often require work closely with local agencies. the port project required approvals from the port of richmond, the city of richmond, richmond redevelopment agency, the national park service, among others. they have tremendous experience in navigating these processes. odi processes -- projects are all about creating jobs and using local partners for that strategy. in conclusion, they have

completed projects of this type and skill for more than 20 years. pier 70 is an invaluable opportunity to create new jobs and enhance san francisco's cultural and historic fabric. >> thank you. this is an exciting point in time for the project. i want to acknowledge the work of the team. we have several members of the waterfront advisory group. they've been wanting it to be something more than it is now for a long time. they've been actively working on it since 1999.

for this particular initiative, we want to make sure we talked to everybody. i want to thank lindsey swanson who retired but came back to work part time with us and spent most of the spring and summer about reading, talking to people -- outreaching, talking to people, making a lot of phone calls, and having a lot of meetings. i am getting referrals out of that. people know about this and are interested in pier 70. not all of them felt like they had what it takes to step up, but they all know more about it now. the other thing we did is to spruce up the buildings to the extent possible. linda worked with the team and the department of public works to get them cleaned out enough where people could safely walk

through. we have been out of the last several weeks boarding up windows and trying to patch roofs. the weather cooperated. we got ahead of it. there are other folks that i want to acknowledge. brian and matt take us through. it is a little scary out there at times. the finance group found the funds so we can get a different cleanup items done. jerrod helped to coordinate because to get to the buildings, you have to walk through the shipyard. that is not an easy thing to get approved. i would like to remind you we will be back in february with more detailed analysis and recommendations. we have three exciting teams who have the vision, skills, and talent. i would welcome any questions

you have at this time. >> any public comment? >> i just want to mention that the central waterfront advisory group will be hearing presentations on february 8. that is another good opportunity to get an early read on what each team is offering. thank you. >> any other public comment? any comment from the commissioners? i think this is a promising development. i want to thank the staff for all of the effort they put in. we would also like to thank all of the interested parties and developers putting in proposals.

we look forward to the next step. >> i am also very excited. it is a nice counterpoint to a more tech feel to mission bay. we have an opportunity to create a destination that will attract people to a part of the city that has not been utilized as much to support the arts. i think all of the proposals have shown there will be support for the art community. i applaud that. that makes san francisco unique. we need to make sure we preserving our artists. as we sit in the very building today, we need to think of something akin to this for local businesses. this is an opportunity to have something much like the very building -- ferry building for local artists or producers that

is uniquely san francisco. we could create another destination in that area. i think that is being proposed by all of the different teams that have come forward. i am very excited about this. i want to thank kathleen and her team. we need to make sure we come up with novel ideas to develop the property. >> there is more boutique- industrial. the american industrial center is right next to as. there's a range of uses and activities. they are full. i am sure we have markets. we need to find the capital. the range of uses seems real interesting. >> and also like to take kathleen, the planning staff,

and all of you in the room. -- i would also like to thank kathleen, the planning staff, and all of you in the room. this has been a long project. we have had many workshops and planning sessions. a lot of work went into this prior to putting together the rfp. david spent a lot of long nights working with various groups. at that point, we did not know if this would ever get to this point. i want to congratulate everybody for working so hard to get to this stage. thank you. >> any of the comments? ready for the next item. >> of date on engineering investigation to bring pier 30 up to code compliance.

>> it is a suggestion that we take a five minute break. the commissioners can take a break. >> item 10a on the investigation

to bring pier 38 up to code compliance. >> i guess i can still say good morning for one second. i am the project engineer for the pier 38 project. we're here to give an update on the engineering investigation for code compliance. i am peter lua. since the last informational update, the consultants have performed a detailed investigation to document the existing conditions of the facilities. we have performed selected the motion to investigate the

various systems. [no audio]

>> that information has been presented to you before. we did a safety assessment in september. there was a town hall meeting with tenants, the fire chief, and others downstairs. the second phase of the project, with a joint agreement with the port of san francisco. we have been involved with the port for the last six years. our team included architects and engineers who participated in the study we just completed. the study focused on compliance and occupancy. the court asked us to identify what needed to be done to the building to allow permitted

occupancy in those buildings. the first thing we have to do was to validate code violations. we identified code violations in the initial phases last august. that required during a more detailed construction investigation. construction was done without permits and inspections. we did have to open up walls and look for existing conditions to identify what was in there. we will talk about that in more detail. michael did an occupancy steady. we're looking at the occupancy low. there are some triggers in the building code that if you change the occupancy by too much, you can trigger a seismic upgrade requirements. those are very costly. we're trying to avoid those triggers. that is part of the equation we used in the study. we developed construction cost estimates and the different ways

to implement the recommendations. the existing conditions, i will go through this quickly because i am told you have heard this before. it is two stories of an existing building at a master tenant occupied. their offices on the first floor. about 12,000 square feet on the first floor. there was assembly use on the second floor. there was parking and storage in the building. that was about 68,000 square feet. there was an exterior marina on the north side of the pier, a light vessel marina. we found there were non- compliant issues in the existing building. michael contributed to that. is there anything you want to say about existing conditions?

>> i want to point out the last permitted application for the ground floor was for restaurant uses. that is not how the spaces were actually utilized. >> there were some construction documents that went to the billing department at the port. permits were issued. the construction that resulted was never completed. they never occupied it as a restaurant. the types of code violations were discovered included fire safety and exiting violations. this is an obstructed egress on the second floor. fire and life safety issues with the doorway with a six-foot opening. it is supposed to be a minimum of 6'8".

>> when you modify a building, you cannot have steps in the path of trouble -- travel. there are head clearance issues and others in this one particular area. there were multiple mechanical and blogging code violations. -- plumbing code violations. we also found sanitary, sewer, plumbing vents open inside the bathrooms. there were electrical code violations. there was exposed electrical power. power demand exceeded circuit capacity because of the wiring. i think this was a high-tech

incubator, assembly. it was a very creative occupancy. they were doing creative things in order to be there. the electrical code violations included electrical panels that had exposed supply. the panels did not have the panel covers. the doors were not attached. it was a life-safety hazard in many different ways. part of our project, now we're getting into the code complete occupancy studies. the work we've done since september, we had to open up existing construction to validate the construction to see if things complied or not. we identified locations that we

wanted to have opened up. port maintenance people went in there and exposed the existing construction so we could record high it was built and what we found. we looked at wall and floor assembly and construction and assembly. >> some things we found we open up the wall assembly validated the concern to have the building closed. areas where there should have been certain types of assembly in terms of how the wall was built up, the sheet rock was not the right type. that would require it be removed and be reapplied if we did work in the future. we found some conditions where the floor was less stable than we would have liked in terms of how it was assembled.

this is something where you cannot have a built up a column in a corner. that is a structural issue. this is an example of things we found in many areas that we opened up. on the second floor of the building, there was a raised structural area and was part of assembly use. there was an area that goes over the access driveway. we found there were areas where reframing could not support the code load. it was not safe. we also went on the water. we looked at the prince the -- north and south aprons. it has timber joists adn decking with asphalt topping.

the south apron is unsafe. this is one example of multiple locations where we found this problem. there are unsupported and missing piles and beams. they cannot support the lows. we have identified multiple locations on the aprons. they are designated for public access. they are part of the emergency exit out of the building on the second floor and the stairs out of the building. that is a serious problem that needs to get repaired. there were cracked and bent beams that probably reduces the capacity by 50%. these are problems that need to be repaired before the apron is

used again for public access and occupancy. there was a whole -- hole in the area where the tenant was using a boat hoist in his storage operation. the tenant did put in a steel plate to cover up this spot. that structure hazard should be repaired before we reach occupy the building. we also did an assessment of the marina. the marina was constructed with the california department of boating and waterways funds. they have some interest in this arena -- marina. the floats are light duty.

they are probably proper on a lake or sheltered marina, but not durable enough for the unprotected port and bay environment. ed told me the original plans may have included a floating breakwater to attenuate the waves on the floats. one image we found shows a section of the. damaged. it was not damaged when we went out there. it is vulnerable to damage. there are areas where the connections have failed. it has electrical panels for the mored vessels.

those are damaged with exposed power. there is a history of pier damage. we have recommendations about the marina as well. after we came up with the condition assessment and validated the problems, the main point of the study was the port wanted to tell them what they had to do to become compliant and reoccupy the buildings. michael took the lead in this effort. we looked at two auctions and the different phases of implementation. one option was to have office occupancy in the first and second floor. the second option was office occupancy and assembly occupancy on the second floor. we were looking at how much parking we could put in theire, in the shipbuilding s --hed --

shed building. we had five goals in the study. we were looking at correcting the code violations to comply with code. we aimed to satisfy the public's safety requirements for public access. we wanted to maximize the real estate assets. we worked with the port engineering staff and real- estate staff to evaluate the cost and return on costs. we did not want to trigger the seismic upgrades that could go into tens of millions of dollars. we aimed to maximize parking that maximizes revenue for whatever option we choose. micah will go over the occupancy options that we looked at. -- michael will go over the