the fourth phase and it could happen, ten to 15 years down the road and however, what is happening now, is that forest city, is in a process of sort of reevaluating the phases, and the use, program, and that will be analyzed under sequa and so the phasing could change and it could change now as a result of that analysis and it could also change because the market conditions end up being much bet and her more sustained than the currently conservatively estimating and so all that we have are the current estimates and we will be back in front of you with a revised forest city plan before the sequa starts to give you an update about the phasing plan and the uses in that area. >> and just, and just kind of in agreement with commissioner murphy, that i am not quite sure, why we are promising, if they have to be moved in and we know that eventually they will

have to move, that we are promising another site within the port and we don't even know if that is available. >> and so, two that point, and so that is something that we, actually asked for. and we have a mechanism to relocate port tens under pretty much all port leases. and, because of the phasing and uncertainty here, and we were wanting to have a number of different options, affordable, is occupying this 20th and illinois parcel right now, and that is a very important parcel in terms of trying to relocate that use so that we can build out the 20th street historic buildings and have construction staging and eventually parking and so we are, we went to affordable to ask them to move. and they were initially, as jerry told you looking for a ten-year term, and we negotiated back from the ten-year term and we wanted a number of options to be aible to relocate them and this is

actually a port option, should we choose it. to relocate them within the five-year term. and then, after that, we have one year options, that are at the port election and so there is no requirement to relocate after that initial five-year term and this is just if we wanted to move them even earlier. >> and within the first five years. >> but the extensions, that does not apply. >> the extensions it does not apply, and this was really, negotiating back from their request for a ten-year location. and so we appreciated their flexibility and in responding to the options that we put forward and we also appreciated forest city accepting the idea that some of these ten sendcies will exist at the water front site beyond their entitlement dates and when we first negotiated the dna there was a thought that we might deliver the whole site clean free of tenants and we have done work

with both parties to get more comfortable with the longer term leasing. >> is the current estimate that in the first five years, given that the forest city is in the development that they will not probably face that relocation issue but it could be the case after five years? >> that is right. >> okay. that is the summary, okay. >> and any further questions or comments? >> all in favor? >> aye. >> aye. >> and okay. resolution, number, 13-45 has passed. >> and 13-46. >> sorry 13-46 as well. >> thank you. >> item 10 a. request authorization to enter into a grant agreement with san francisco planning and urban research association ("spur") for the "adapting to rising tides: mission creek san francisco, california" project. (resolution no. 13-47. >> good evening commissioners and administration, and i am here representing a larger

team, led by brad benson behind me and dave, persad from engineering and carlinsky from spur and we are here to ask you for an authorization to enter into a grant agreement with spur. and at the point overlooking mission bay, and so 1860s. this chart shows, the level rise since the 1900s and the science is very clear, the sea level rise will occur, over the next 50 and 100 years, and a study found that for portland, sea level, it is expected to rise, between ten to 17 inches, by 2050 and between 31 to 69

inches by 2100. executed. and this proposed study represents the staff and a larger effort to address the sea level rise and bewe know that it will impact our property and far less is known about adaptation strategies. and the map here, is the sea wall from china basin north as you see as part of the embarcadero national district and the sea wall south appear 54 was constructed after the 1950s, and my poor attempt to show you where mission creek is located. and mission creek provides a really ideal location to study adaptation strategies because it is one of the lowest lying areas. and storm water run off from mission bay, also trains to mission creek and complicating future flooding events and this is an ideal place to study and this graphic shows the existing condition in green, and in red, the 2050 scenario, and with 15

inches of sea level rise and in blue, the scenario with a55 inches of sea level rise. >> this proposed study is the out growth of prior sea level rise work and led by dcdc on its adaptation adapting to rising tides project and this project is a collaborativive planning effort to help san francisco communities to adapt to the rise and event flooding. this project has engaged local regional and state and federal agency and organizations as well as non-profits and private association. together this project, team and its partners are working towards the project goal of increasing the bay area's preparedness and the sea level rise and strong events and protecting critical systems dcdc led the project study in concert with the dutch knowledge for the climate

research program. >> this is the study in the map here. >> furtherance of this project, delta alliance has awarded the engineering firm which specializes in coastal engineering and 80,000 grant for the project area, mission creek and this identifying a project area and looking at adaptation and moving to i is a key. >> it requires the city to provide the matching funds, equal to 100 percent of the donations that is an $80,000 from the city. the city has asked spur to be the project manager for this work because of the most recent success if managing a similar grant involving multiple federal and state and local partners to the effects of erosion along ocean beach.

and it has a tight schedule and requires the coordination and also the interest in building upon the proposed partnership as we develop and implement the city rise, and there are elements that we will need that are reflected here and non-profit partnership and building upon the prior work in this case and in the excellent science and to facilitate the development of the grant, funds, and the city, through the port, will enter into a grant agreement with spur, and will compensate spur for $30,000 for the project management services. >> this chart shows the city's contributions and you can see the port of san francisco, and it will propose and contribute, $25,000, also partnering with the public utility commissions and also 25,000, and the planning department, 20 and the

department of public works, 20,000 and the city administrator's office, $20,000. and this combined with the grant awarded 80 has a total project budget of 190,000, and 160, will be for the engineering and the evaluation study and 30 will be for spur for the project management, and it is a really nice showing that all city departments have confirmed their contribution and are contributing to this effort.

and with your approval today, we expect to execute the grant and have the study completed by mid 2014. >> so we are asking for your approval to enter into a grant with spur, and we believe that this is an excellent effort that will help us move along and what is a very big project. and that we will all be engaging in for many years to come. >> so moved. >> second. >> all right, comment, woods? >> good afternoon commissioners i am really excited about this study, wearing two hats and i live on mission creek and so the sea level rise is an immediate concern, and i also

with the committee and we have spent many years working on developing the mission bay project and the port owned parks all around the shore line. and knowing how we can adapt to rising tides is a critically important piece.

>> thank you. >> any other public comment, and comments from commissioners? no. sorry. >> sue, and i am glad that you are tackling and not going to become republican naysayers, i want to point out that you have the jurisdiction along the shore line. i want to remind you what you did a couple of minutes ago. that see wall is in the flood season and at 330, and the

other sea wall are all to flooding and sooner or later the port has to deal with lands that they own on the other side of the embarcadero as well as the piers. >> i am going to pay attention to these studies as well and i would just put out your schedule, and for awarding the warriors, is they have a lease that will end in 2080. and you look at this, and this is between, 10 to 17 inches, and 2050 and 31 to 69 by 2100

and so just kind of split the difference. and we have a big problem. and the port has toto as we

undertake it and we have to keep it in mind and we appreciate the public comment that the rarina has to take that into consideration and we want to keep this in the forefront and we as a commission have asked the staff to keep us updated periodically not only with the study but with anything else that we can. and i think that i also want to point out not just with spur. we are working with bcdc and i recently had the opportunity to talk with the chairman. and this is as you know, one of the number one priorities and i think >> if we do our seven and a half miles and the others

don't, that snot going to happen. i think that is critical to the future, and the safety of the city of san francisco and for the city and for the port. >> obviously, and i am delighted that all of these different agencies and departments are chiping in, and to help out with this study and i think that it is very, very important. and the more that we, the more, valid that we get, and we get from this, and we can sometimes, some time in the future, formulate the plan, and what we are going to do about it. and i have seen something in there, where there is a dutch company? yeah, and they are... and they are the experts in that field. and for any of you, who have been to amsterdam they have done a great job keeping the water on for many years and so we need all of the experts and

how are we are going to get them we are going to fund them. i am delighted. >> thank you. >> well, all in favor? >> aye. >> okay. resolution, number 1 3-47 has passed. >> okay. >> and item 11, new business? >> okay, i want to raise just one topic of new business in response to a comment that was made during and that is i am not going to read the statement but i think that i just want for the public record to be noted that the port did issue a public statement about 8 washington. and renee martin did put out a statement in terms of opposition and i think that we should refer to that statement and i would ask you to just put that in the record in terms of what our response. and so it isn't that we didn't respond, we did make a comment on 8 washington in the ballot initiative and that should be for the record as well. >> okay. >> thank you. >> will do. >> any other items for new business?

>> yes? >> yeah. i would like next month to, and so we can get an update on where they are at with the negotiations between metro and the port, and the iow and kind of get an update on where they are going, and before it comes to the full port commission and have they sat down and where is that, thank you. >> okay. >> okay. >> any other items? >> commissioners? >> okay. >> and then i have the motion for adjournment? >> seconded. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> thank you. >> we are adjourned. >> thank you. >>