thanks for having us. first, i would like to thank the courport staff members for r dispatch and vigorous this in pursuing this deal. a brief reminder, we are in development. -- orton development. we have to take one second to find a slide show. >> well you are looking for it, does that match and that that we are given? >> yes. that slide that just won by is really our cover.

we are on the second page. again, you selected us and we feel very privileged to be selected. because of our experience with similar projects. we specialize in large scale of this industrial rehabilitation. we have been fortunate to earn the confidence of some of our country's leading innovators. we are going to keep the project update -- give you a project update. we have perfected the our lease of the noted building and have opened up our offsite office. we have completed an access agreement which has allowed us to understand the premises. we have completed our negotiation agreement, which of course, allows us to proceed

with the term sheet and lease. we're in the middle of our listening tour where we are trying to engage community leaders and local community activists, others interested, to hear from them and make sure that we hear only what people want to see at the site before we finish our design. we have done our ceqa analysis. including project scope and uses. we are deeply involved in our design construction division -- vision and the construction techniques we would use to the project built. we have conducted numerous tenant tors and have the probe the market to understand where that is that venting. we have begun our financial modeling. and we have assembled a first-

rate san francisco-based team to take the project forward. i will spare everyone the reading of the slide, but it is a strong team that is extremely motivated to see this wonderful san francisco asset returned to viability. after all of this, we have concluded that this is a dual but extremely difficult project. another way to say that is a typical odi project. >> we might say typical san francisco. >> will take hands-on management, everyone's cooperation, and every constituent will get most of what they want, but not everyone will get what they want. it is our job to make every penny squeal. if we do that, we can create a

wonderful new community and make a decent return for you and us. >> james whip orton development. i will speak briefly to the project goals, scope of the construction, and proposed use for each building. our goal is to bring the buildings back to life, to fill them with businesses and jobs, and to create productivity. pier 70 has the potential to become one of the most vibrant parts of san francisco, a unique synthesis of invention, education, art, and recreation. at the outset, we need to address the immediate problems with the buildings. this includes challenges with site security, when authorization of the buildings, and addressing the threat of imminent collapse in several buildings as well. the buildings, over time, have

been gutted by the thieves and elements. our projection scope is designed to repair the damage and modernize the system that have been stolen or broken completely. all of our work will be consistent with the secretary stated for historic preservation. and generally, buildings north of 20th street, were historically offices, and will go back to office use. we anticipate there will be and to their retail, some restaurants, and a return to some of the original amenities. the buildings out of 20 street will remain production-oriented with ancillary retail. we anticipate also to have arts and education-related uses. over all, this is very much designed to create a pedestrian thoroughfare feel through the street. i will run through each of the

building quickly and specifically what kinds of uses we anticipate. building 101 is the first building the public encounters. historically the bethlehem steel offices. we plan to return these buildings back to use of office -- as offices. we would like to create a ground-floor restaurant in the existing cafeteria space. that restaurant will be designed to serve the tenants, crane cove park, and the community. the next building is 102, the historic power house. we feel it is well-suited for a restaurant or offices. the basement with the layout will for amenities like classrooms, and jim's -- gyms available for the tenants. right now, power is routed through the building, but that would need to be rerouted before developing the building. 104 is an historic office

building with serious seismic challenges. our goal is to make the building safe. want to return the office used back to office. we like to have the retail on 20th street and have some night watchman on the upper floor. lou to the south side, building 14 is an existing warehouse. we plan to add some windows and doors. we anticipate some sort of industrial or ancillary retail office use will come into the space. moving around, buildings 113 and 114. these are enormous soaring brick buildings. they are in danger of imminent collapse. we think their dues is ideal for the use of makers of various sizes, but first we need to make some seismic reinforces -- reinforcements.

i will turn it over to eddie to talk about that. >> we are fortunate to have a couple of people deeply engaged in this project. they have produced a design that adds seismic -- padding lateral forces by adding mezzanines at the same level of the existing mezzanine that is already in 113. we will mirror that around 113 and extend to 114. that will be the central horizontal diaphragm to permanently secure this building against seismic risk. here we are looking down at the building, the way that the

mezzanine will look. the other major portion of the seismic restraint system is this k brace. as you may recall, there is an existing 20-ton crane in the building. we would use that as part of our wall system. the k brace will run right underneath a crane, and we will build glass walls of 16 feet. so when you walk into the atrium and look into either of the spaces, this will be the most common expression of space. you will be looking through 16 feet of glass to see the building in its original grandeur.

>> the last two buildings are part of 115 and 116. we believe those buildings are well suited for like mixed industrial use and probably arts-related uses. we have a number of public areas. 20th street is designed to be a natural extension of the community. it was designed to be an active pedestrian focused thoroughfare. we are designed make connections to crane cove park and through the atrium that any described. the piazza is space for the public which will be a hub of activity. we suspect the uses will change throughout the day, but there will be arts, markets,

happenings, a place for the community to meet and recreation. with respect to the timetable, we are moving forward at a rapid pace. the want to thank staff once again in their responsiveness. we look forward to working with them over the next couple of months to finalize documentation. we hope to begin actually fixing the building by the end of this year into beginning of next year. that is our presentation. thank you for the opportunity. we are here for any questions. >> is there any public comment? commissioners? >> i just want to thank you for the thought that has gone into this. we san franciscans are proud of our historic tradition, so it is nice to see what is happening

with preserving these buildings. it was our hope that we could find somebody who would appreciate the unique nature of this, so i appreciate all the thought that has gone into that. looking at your timetable, i saw someone that you anticipate you may have some tenants moving in in 2013? is that accurate? >> fourth quarter 2013, we could start moving in some tenants if we can get the paperwork done by this year. there are some delays that are more easily adapted. we still have a few very important hurdles, which is really sitting down with the port department and inspection staff to make sure we understand what can and cannot be built here.

there are compromises that have to be agreed to but if we can make this area safe, we can return them to productive use starting in 2013. >> as part of your listening tour, have there been any surprises or added in sides coming through from the process? >> we have been very heartened by the response. there are a lot of people who love this project and want to see it succeed. i think it reinforces some of the obvious, particularly the divorce between pier 70 and the rest of the city and the need to broach that. i think that leads to a future conflict that we are mediating, not so much a part of. there will be a conflict between -- the community has a

desire to see spaces that are small enough that people who live and pass on the tiller can put their businesses there. to do that, we will have to create more doors and windows than exists now. that will impinge on some of the desires of the historic community. so we have this upcoming debate between maintaining the purity of the front of the building. we are designers. if you ask us, we know what to do. sometimes, we are overruled. i think that the listening tour has show that there will be a discussion about some competing interests. in general, people have been very supportive and open to our ideas.

we are about halfway through it. we will continued to amend and improve our design as we learn. >> i would also commend you for listening to the community but my question would be more related to actual people of interested in using the site. so getting the community support in the immediate area, that they support buildings of this type. in terms of potential users and tenants, where do you stand? i know you cannot obviously offer anything specific, but what has been the interest level? >> have also been very heartened by the response from the market. the space is exciting. it is just exciting. the question that arises in people's mind is, can be delivered? we have taken a lot of people on the tours of our properties and

removing that sense of doubt, and as that occurs, the excitement is palpable. >> do you think you will have building requests? >> our next step is to build a cold shall which will allow us to allow this flexibility for a long time. we are is superstitious company and do not like to talk about -- we are heartened, -- i would just put it that way. >> i see nothing here for residential, so that would still not big on your agenda? >> i believe there are other sites on the parcel that have been suggested for residential, but ours does not include it, except the night watchman units. >> you have completed the ceqa documentation?

>> we completed the analysis and approach. we are looking for some guidance here to see if we're going in the right direction. if we are, we have a deadline on the 19th to prepare some draft documents. port staff offered to put them in a form that they feel would present well. so we will " -- move forward quickly on that. so the strategy and the ideas have been completed. >> you mentioned several buildings that were and significant state of disrepair. has everything been done to shore them up so that we are not going to have any impending problems, if anything falls down? >> there is some mitigation in place, but one of the reason that the poor, community, and ourselves are moving so quickly is so that we can fix those

buildings once, and not do a palliative, which would do nothing and that nothing to the project. one of the reasons we're all precut -- pressurizing the situation so we can get there and do that seismic mitigation the first time properly. >> i know a number of people have raised the potential idea of facility that would lend themselves well to film production. i did not hear anything mentioned. it looks like some of the buildings will be broken down into smaller spaces. and the opportunity or thought into what has gone on with any potential movie hangar -- whatever they are called? >> we have had a lot of people come through the building. my gut feeling is that the demand is not sufficient to

solely use this space for that use. i think there are enough wonderful, deeply san franciscan entities, organizations, that can use this space and a more important way. while we are investigating it, i do not have a lot of hope for it. >> this is an exciting project. there was a time when we did not know how we would preserve these buildings, so i'm so happy that you have stepped up and are doing such a thorough job. i look forward to working with you and see the outcome. thank you. i would end by just saying, if you are tried to get some consensus with the commission, this presentation helps to validate that you are on the right track and we are in agreement with you. >> thank you very much. >> item 10a.

request approval of the fiscal rates, and special event and filming rates. >> port leasing manager. i am seeking your approval of the agreements read by the secretary. the executive director was directed to engage in agreements with licenses, and you's if the agreement that certain parameters, such as the tenant would sign the boilerplate police, the rental rates would be reflected in the approved port commission schedule and the realistic step also provides the commission with a monthly report of this activity, at least that is what i hope made it to the commission. the san francisco of this market is strengthening the first

quarter of 2012, on pace to continue to grow. asking rents have increased as well along the waterfront. that has been steadily improving. over the last 12 months, we have executed about 70 agreements worth about $5 million annualized. this compares to the same period last year, 78 agreement worth $3.2 million. so a few less leases, but larger dollar value. our current vacancy it is 10.1%, as opposed to the city average of 11%. the san francisco industrial market stood at 8.75%. the port current vacancy for industrial is 5%. a combined total of office and warehouse of port property is

3.2%. following a review of commercially available data, we are proposing to make changes to our rent schedule. some of the highlights -- we propose to increase rates that 401, pier 26, 28, but bullpen office buildings. we also want to increase the warehouse land rates. increase floor covering rates to $5 a square foot from $3.50 a square foot. included in the package, contract and, and received a memorandum from third-party consultant who tends to confirm our results. regarding parking, we have a fairly high vacancy rate, 24%, partly due to adding 97 parking stalls, however, overall revenue is up to 470,000, an increase

of 87,000 over the same period of last year. we propose no changes in the rates. special lens and filming. we are requesting to say the administrative time, your time, fee waivers for fleet week, and usual proposed reductions in the event such as the small fishing gear swap meet, delancey street christmas tree lot, and that concludes my presentation. >> so moved. >> second. >> public comment? we have not yet received the report. hopefully, it is on its way. >> i will bring it to you personally. >> we received the monthly sales

report but not the peace report. >> i will personally deliver that. >> we had discussions with staff, so i think we are fairly well briefed on this item. i would like a motion to approve. all in favor? aye. resolution 1252 has passed. >> thank you. >> 10b. request approval of lease no. l-15150 with ammunition, llc for approximately 9,652 square feet of office space with a term of 52 months, located at 10 lombard street, roundhouse two, and subject to board of supervisors' approval. >> jeffrey bell hour. ammunition is a san francisco- based company currently employing about 60 persons. they are a sub-tenant. mk think is the master lease

holder. in june they approached staff in order to meet some of their space needs. we toured 10 lombard. negotiations have led to the development of it until lease, which is now before year end of the to the board of supervisors. the lease provides for 9006 and a 52 square feet of office. the monthly rent is 22,200 to $2, about $2.31 a square foot, which is somewhat higher than the proposed rate. that is a blended rate. the fourth floor we are getting more than the third four. the term is 52 months. you may be wondering why 52 months. that is coterminous with their current master-tenant lease. if mk think this is not to

exercise their option, they would have like to -- they would like to fill out the rest of the building. in consideration of this period, which is not part of the report, late negotiations, we agree to a one-time 60-day rate abatement extension that our sole discretion and only if for some reason the port would hold up the processing to building permit, there would be some unforeseen conditions. instead of getting there and having to come back and amend least, we are requesting, at the discretion of the executive director. the lease requires ammunition to construct $288,000 of

construction improvement. they will have one right an exclusive the gratian's for an additional five years the lease is brought before you because the term in the rent abatement do exceed the criteria found in the port commission business parameters. all other terms and conditions are consistent with that. it also required for a supervisor approval. the revenue, which i believe is about $1.3 million, requires supervisor approval. finally, the net effect of the investment translates to $18.46 a square foot, $178,000 of net capital investment in port property. lastly, the third floor, we get efficiencies. there are no common areas, so we get 100% read the efficiency.

a very good deal. i request your approval. >> so moved. >> second. >> is there any public comment? all in favor? aye. resolution 1253 has passed. thank you. >> 10c. request authorization to execute a mutual termination agreement with city building inc., a california corporation, lease no. l-14950 for premises located at pier 26 annex. >> commissioners, said jeffrejey bower. this is adjacent to the bay bridge. pier 26 adjacent to the bay bridge.

city bill and was the original developer of this space. ido followed suit. in 1994, these were the first many developments. city recently negotiated and executed davies which reduced some of their space. we subsequently granted that to ideo. building does desire to get out of their lease. we have a policy where the executive director can terminate a lease, however, the city building leased is outside of that. that is due to the amount of rent they pay. so rather than a sublease or assigned, ideo requested a direct landlord-tenant relationship. they are currently pay us $40,000 a month