tv Government Access Programming SFGTV August 16, 2018 5:00pm-6:01pm PDT
lessor, will have its own sublease. the port will be in contract, is in contract today with t.z.k. broadway l.l.c., the partnership made up of kenwood, tiatro and zanni. >> president k. brandon: my question, it may not be today but when we get the final for the presentation, to understand since the project cost has gone up $10 million, i see the efforts to minimize and given the amount of time, since time always costs money, it's admirable to find ways to make things more efficient in terms of the design. if we could understand exactly how each of the partners are contributing to the holding l.l.c. and the equity and so we need to understand the equity component as well for that component. if you don't have the answer
yet today that would be something i think we would be interested in understanding and in addition to the fact we have been given some pro-forma financials on the rental income. what it's going to be, the balance sheet, what it will be the actual financial statements over the new holding company and who was contributing what to that would be helpful for us to know in terms of any final approvals here. >> sure when we come back to you with all of that information and have a complete financial package for you when we come back. >> president k. brandon: the last thing, i appreciate that the gentleman from presidio says they have been involved with hospitality since 2000. if he could perhaps discuss the projects he has done so we have a sense of the types of hotels. you mentioned the areas but didn't quite mention the types of hotels, size-wise and sort of target market, etc., etc.
>> sure, sure, very happy to. first our grand partners are marriott and hilton. the two companies we primarily execute various different brands within that segment from luxury to select serve. our recent projects we completed a year ago talking about nine years or ten years in terms of development project. we started a project just next to the beringer winery, we went through the process and entitlements and opened the project in march of 2017. that's under the luxury collection brand. same brand that the palace here in san francisco would be under marriott. that's a 68-room high-end luxury five-star resort that we opened up and it's a little over a year that we have been open on that project. so that's in the luxury sector. we primarily play in a full
service to upper and select serve space. so that would be within hyatt full service, courtyard by marriott, residence and so forth. we just broke down ground on golden round arena, 175-room hotel there. those are the two projects that would be more in line with the difficulty and the complexity of the project for you right now. but all the other projects are pretty much in the mainstream. >> will this hotel be branded with one of those chains. >> the current conversation is with marriott and within that brand of family there is a brand called a.c. by marriott, a new brand originated in europe and has now come to the u.s. and so that is marriott's number one development brand right now as a portfolio in
terms of magnitude of development in the u.s. we feel that brand fits the style and delivery we need to make it financially viable, as well as very much more complimentary to how zin zanni will be performing and executing their business plan. that brand stays in the upper higher end select serve range right under full serve. it's a unique product. we will have more information on that as we come back to you for approvals but that's the brand we are in discussions with. >> you will be continuing your ongoing equity interest in the project once you get it developed? >> yes, that is what we do. we are owners and asset managers. we have a third party management company that does those services for us. but we will be overseeing that and all our projects we are the
majority equity. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you. thank you everyone for a wonderful report and update. i just need clarification here. so on the staff report it has the information presentation, blah, blah, blah. on the agenda it has and the proposed first amendment to the e.n.a. and in the staff report it has approval of an amendment to an e.n.a. in september. did we hear anything about this? >> no, you aren't approving an e.n.a. i have executed my delegated authority in terms of extending the e.n.a. and when staff comes back to you in september they will be requesting your approval of an extension. so i'm sorry the agenda language included that dangler,
that dangling sentence about the extension. you won't be approving an extension today. >> so the first will only be an extension, nothing else? >> yes. that's right. >> and the proposed extension isn't until when? because you under your executive director could extend up to four and now we will be going beyond four. >> that's right. >> yes, when we come back to ask for an extension, we are going to be asking for a six-month extension. currently on the time line they are opening that, ceqa will be completed by the end of this year and then lease negotiation in january. we think by february or march we should be able to come back to you for approval of the lease. but just in case there's any further delay, we will include an option for another one
6-month extension, if it's necessary to get this project past the go line. >> okay, with that new information, does anyone have any questions? commissioner makras. >> have they paid $50,000 for each extension? >> yes. >> president k. brandon: okay. thank you so much. we really appreciate the update. >> item 12 b informational presentation regarding anchor hospitality group response to the request for proposal for a restaurant opportunity at pier 33 1/2 located at bay street and the embarcadero.
>> good evening, commissioners. mike martin, deputy director of real estate development. i will give a brief bit of content and hand it to jay edwards our senior property manager to go through prot ses and we will have our proposer for the site at 33 1/2 to speak to you and take your questions. this item is resulting from the issuance of the sort of ongoing commissioners know of two r.f.p.'s at the same time for two different restaurant locations. one, the former butterfly site at pier 33 1/2. the other pier 40, former carmen's restaurant. each of those r.f.p.'s received one proposal. we as staff have worked through this proposal to ensure it meets qualifications go back to you for this information item.
as you have asked in the past we are doing this ahead of requesting your approval of the award of the contract so you have an opportunity to engage with the proposers. the pier 40 site will be back with you in september to talk about next steps on that one. i wanted to thank the port team that's here today that's worked hard on this to get this to you today. jay edwards, bob davis who helped us out with coordination of community outreach as well as the tours and all the things that go into informing people about the opportunity. we have sandra overly who couldn't be here but she is a project manager that did yeoman's work. we have consultants represented by blackburn, their report was part of your staff report. materials. and then from the proposer we have from anchor hospitality, derek smith and mr. sandoval.
with that i will hand it over to jay edwards to give us the overview. thanks. >> thank you, mike. jay edwards, senior property manager. good evening, commissioners. so as you may recall we came to you last year with a request for proposal for this site. this site, as mike said, the former butterfly site, 4600 square feet that has great bayviews, high ceilings, a lot of appeal to it. so we also did a full assessment of the site included with our r.f.p. and there was a lot of code compliance and work required to be done to the site. so we will get into that a little further in our presentation but suffice to say it would take significant investment to bring this to a new restaurant opportunity.
so we have a prospective respondent that is prepared to do so and we will tell you about that. in our request for proposal we had quite an extensive selection process. in front of you is some of the selection criteria that the proposer has to actually go through and fill out -- >> i hate to stop you, but due to the lateness of the hour, and we only got one proposal, can we just get to the point? >> absolutely. >> [laughter] >> that's fine with me. let's do that. we will skip through this. i want to say we did extensive outreach as you are aware. >> wonderful. >> we have factors affecting it, we will skip that. and then we will get into actually the selection process so we will have our proposal come up here and this will kind of shorten it up for you. >> okay.
>> good suggestion, thank you. so with that in mind we were going to convene an advisory process, that wasn't necessary with the one respondent but what we decided was really crucial to do is evaluate the approvals and make sure it did meet minimum qualifications outlined in our r.f.p. so through our work with century urban we did ascertain with port staff and their expertise, yes the anchor holding proposal met the minimum qualifications and was actually a very good proposal, attractive in a number of different ways including aesthetically and financially. with that, we would like to introduce you to the proposer because that was the intent of this meeting was to meet our respondent. so i would like to introduce you to derek smith. derek smith is a managing partner. he will be handling the project management. derek has extensive experience
in this endeavor, if you will and has worked closely with the local community in hiring local people. he has a community engagement plan he is going to activate and we are really excited to have derek, mick and his partners here tell you about their proposed concept. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, jay. madam chair, commissioners, director, derek smith here on behalf of anchor hospitality. i will try to make this as quick as possible. we are here today to present porto sf, which is not the name of our restaurant but absolutely a place holder until we figure out what we will name this restaurant. i have here today my partner mick, jim maxwell, who is the architect, and our designer and
she had to leave and we also have our culinary partner richard sandoval who has opened many restaurants around the world. a little bit about our partnership structure. our financial partner, h-1 hospitality. which is a local hospitality company that has been in business for the last six years with properties in san francisco and throughout the bay area. a little bit about richard. richard opened up maya back in 1999 in marathon plaza. he also has a maya restaurant in new york, dubai, as well as qatar. and one of the concepts we have been thinking about is bringing
maya back to san francisco. and that is where we are right now for this property. jim, on the design side has designed 150 restaurants all over the world. local san francisco. and his design partner is anna, who literally lives across the street from the property. as well as nick, who also lives across the street. in terms of construction time line, i mean richard would like to be open before next summer is what we would like to have happen. we have been at this for over a year now, when bob first reached out to say an opportunity was coming, so we are all anxious to move the process forward, get our approval so we can get a lease
negotiated and start construction. operations, again, mick will handle the day-to-day operations of the restaurant. he has been in the business about 20 years. and he will run the restaurant. community engagement. i've been in san francisco doing business for 26 years as a small local business. i have probably interacted with 90% of the small businesses in san francisco over the years, primarily through the construction. but very familiar with c.m.d., city build. all those organizations. and to conclude, if you have any questions we would be happy to answer, otherwise we look forward to moving forward and getting this restaurant open.
thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, commissioners. thanks, derek. i think, maybe in light of the time here, if we may, we could just go right to your comments and sum it up with the next steps. i just want to provide a little bit of perspective. we did do extensive evaluation, it's in your written staff report, we will spare you that this evening. but it's actually very robust and not only that our century urban consultant made some recommendations and can kind of confirm what they had projected and actually came back with a slightly more, i would say, practical approach. lots of due diligence, suffice to say. we are very confident in what's been proposed. these are the business terms they have met and have proposed and then really what our next steps are, are to finish this
today and come back and award this to anchor hospitality, with your blessing and move toward a lease in october and get the board of supervisor approval this november so they can start construction this winter, which is the ideal time so they can meet the next season. with that said, that is our presentation and we are here to answer any questions. thank you. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? seeing no public comment, commissioner gilman? >> i'm sorry, how long has this space been vacant? >> the space was vacated in early 2017. >> that tenant, was his lease up, or his business failed? >> yes. his lease expired. he was on a month-to-month lease. he had some other opportunities coming available and decided it was kind of a mutual decision to part ways. >> okay.
that was my main question. >> commissioner makras? >> could you elaborate on the mutual part of parting ways? wouldn't we want him to stay? were we unhappy? did we give him any notices? >> yes, we had prior discussions about his business plan. his revenue had been increasing. there had been some financial difficulties, he had regrouped. we had tried to maybe look at an extension, a plan to put in place. he decided really that he didn't want to continue on. we agreed, no problem. the lease expired and here we are. >> under our rent schedule is that the $3.50 or different? >> that's the minimum rent.
for the minimum guaranteed base rent. the red is the greater of percentage rent or minimum rent. >> but we publish our rent rates annually. in that publication is it $3.50 for this space? >> the retail rates are not set by the parameter rent. the retail rents are set in the request for proposal process that we went through prior. so that minimum base rent is based on kind of our market understanding what a minimum base rent for space of this nature. >> did we publish it as minimum rent in the r.f.p. >> yes. what number was that? >> $3.50. >> so they just met the number we were asking for. >> yes. >> could you walk me through the rationalization of the 25 points proposed rent and business plan.
walk me through the rate. >> yes, so if i recall and going back through the r.f.p., as i recall that was roughly 25% of the points, i believe 100 points. we felt that was certainly a very important component, however in the case and we thought that was an important component but it was weighted equally with experience of the operator which we also thought was highly important. we had a concept plan we also felt was integral to the success of the restaurant and we had a community engagement so there were various components of that and that's how that point amount was determined. >> great, thank you. >> commissioner woo ho? >> thank you. it sounds like this is a
distinguished group that's come together. we had our consultants tell us in terms of what they think the projections for this type of space and business plan we received there are some differences. if we were to look at other comparable sized restaurants on the waterfront how are the projections we are receiving from anchor compare? >> yes, that was prepared. if i can get my notes here for one second. you are referring to the projected sales revenues commissioners? >> uh-huh. >> that was part of the staff report with century urban. they did review basically what was proposed in terms of sales per square foot which is on the high side. it's a 4600 square foot restaurant.
there's 4.million dollars projected in revenue. that was on the high side but given the location and also basically if you go and look at some of what the competitors say like pier 23, they are doing $5.5 million, waterfront restaurant down the street, slightly bigger, $6.5 million. the previous restauranteur at their peak did about $3 million. if you look at restaurants in the vicinity, they felt it was in line -- >> maybe we could ask them to say why they are so confident in, not only i guess the initial projection but i guess part of the growth rate too. >> yes, and that was mentioned they did -- >> could we have derek or somebody address that issue. >> would you like our
consultant to or operator? >> i would like the operator to tell us why they feel so confident in their projections. >> hi, michael -- i'm the restaurant partner and operating person and i live across the street. i have seen butterfly and so forth. the difference today versus then, those operators were operating, especially even butterfly at the beginning, without the cruise ship terminal, the traffic, without the horn blower wasn't there yet when they were doing the alcatraz cruises. our thing is the amount of foot traffic. it has to be one of the highest foot traffic areas in san francisco, that with the streetcars and amount of traffic. we just feel the place has been completely under utilized for years. we live across the street, 152 lombard and samson. i have been in the neighborhood for years and go to pier 33 and hill stone and go to all those
restaurants in the area. it's just been an under utilized space there. so in the future, the future projections are based more on doing catering in the community. hopefully engaging more with the neighborhood groups with the hotels we are going to build in the future years. i was on the board of the fisherman's wharf association for 7-8 years. from the community benefit district. we have already reached out to them as far as working with the hotel groups and stuff like that. we see catering as our biggest growth part of it. the problem with butterfly, they had a very small bar in there, probably 8-10% of their square footage. we will have a central bar with more traffic flow and we will
have more activity and social environment, should be a fun and energetic environment where tourists can walk by and grab something quick. we plan to utilize the to-go windows, having the breakfast burritos they can have something. >> will you have take-out. >> yeah and the fact we are the only mexican restaurant in the whole neighborhood. there's one mexican restaurant on all of pier 39. we should capitalize that going into a mexican restaurant, having a drink and chips, or people passing casually by. the catering with cruise ship terminal and all the development in the area. it's very lively right now. i live across the street and you see the market right now lining out the door sfor lunch, before levis resigned their
lease it was half empty, the starbucks had a line out the door. i feel the area is vibrant. that's why the projections are up, i think it goes up 10% a year for the next three years and kind of levels out after that. >> okay, thank you. >> mr. makras? thank you very much for this presentation. we appreciate it. look forward to seeing you in september. >> tnk you. >> item 13-a request authorization to enter into a federal cost share agreement with the united states army corps of engineers san francisco district for the san francisco waterfront storm risk management project. >> good evening, commissioners, president brandon, executive director forbes, i'm special projects manager and very happy to be here to present to you on
our feasibility cost-sharing agreement with the army corps of engineers and fortunate to be joined by the san francisco district commander lieutenant colonel traffic rakefield and project manager of the year awardee mark birman we are happy to have with us, thank you for that assignment. >> i know this is extremely important but you know the time of the hour is late. >> i'll be fast, i promise. >> history how we got here in four bullets. we wrote our first letter december 12th, 2012, i wrote it myself, for a little project. army corps determined there appears to be some there there. let's proceed but also look at a bigger program, probably more
suited in terms of scale. so we did those two things in parallel. just a couple months ago we were awarded a scarce new start appropriation, the first slug of money you get for one of these things which is typically a multi-year source of funding that indicates federal commitment. we are excited about that. they are extremely scarce. only six awarded nationwide last year, only two that were flood studies so we were one of two, the previous year there was zero. so we are feeling very fortunate about this. what does that mean? it's a four-step process, you have to get authorization from congress to ask for money for a study and you have to ask for money for the study and get authorized by congress to build something and ask for money to go build something. so a four-step process. we were lucky enough to tap
into the first part from 1996 that covered the bay. moving on, step 2 is to actually conduct the study with the court. that happened with the new start appropriation, the work plan. so the document you are approving today is the disability cost-sharing agreement is really what kicks off the process. we execute, the court, and we can get the study rolling, so the result of that, the end of step 2 is to get a chief of engineers report from army corps of engineer. here is what we want to build, endorsed by the chief of engineers, army corps of engineers, lieutenant general semini, it was a very rare opportunity to get to spend time with him, he was enthusiastic about the project. he is the guy that would sign
off on our study so we could present it to congress. step three is to ask congress to approve it, those only come every couple years so we really want to catch that train before it leaves the station. the agreement itself has a few key elements, 50/50 cost sharon the study side of things. supposed to be no more than $3 million and take no more than three years. we are using the standard army corps form, that's the fastest way and we want to get it done before the end of the fiscal year before the powers that be could change their mind. >> i want to pause, the study area, port wide, not limited to san francisco's seawall. >> thank you for pointing that out. that's right, we have been thinking about it as the seawall, this is much broader.
what are we going to do, as soon as we sign the agreement, we give them a small amount of money to get things started and as we get in we will determine how much we haven't finalized we can get credit for and not have to spend cash. work we have already done. that all happened in the first 90 days. the rest is our 1.5 million of the 3 million we will roll out over the $3 year period. so that's really it. i want to keep it short. i want to thank lots of people to get us to this really important pivotal part of the process. commissioner brandon, director forbes. chief operating officer, bureau of advocacy, we have had great support from senator dianne
feinstein and nancy pelosi. division of army corps of engineers, san francisco district, colonel rayfield and his staff have been great, the port seawall staff have combined to get us this rare opportunity to move forward. so i will stop there. i did want to invite colonel rayfield to just say a couple words. he doesn't want to but -- [laughter] >> thanks for your time. i am carl rayfield. i appreciate your diligence. it was enlightening to see and fun for me. i want to highlight the executive director ms. forbes and entire staff, i have engaged several times, and everybody's comments what can we do today, tomorrow and in the future. we have a vision to solve the
nation's toughest challenges. the seawall is pretty tough from an engineering standpoint. we look forward to determining what's involved and we may want to work together as partners. we appreciate your time and knowing it's a late hour, thank you. >> thank you. commissioner woo ho. first, is there any public comment? no, may i have a motion? second. public comment. come on up. >> commissioners, miguel galarza yerba -- i have had the opportunity to work on numerous shared fund projects throughout california. and the core of engineers commitment to small business
and their opportunity to grow a small business with any community will be an outstanding community to take advantage of a small minority hub zone located businesses within the bayview hunters point to actually grow their capacity and be a viable asset to city and future development of seawall construction. so i highly encourage to look forward to expanding these opportunities with the shared fund program and hopefully have a successful small business engagement. thank you. >> president k. brandon: thank you. commissioner woo ho. >> okay, i think we are all very excited and supportive and i want to thank everyone involve today get us to this point because i know we have worked very diligently and the fact there's only been a few awarded. i'm totally supportive. my question, what will we learn as a result of this. we talk about the seawall and
it's a $5 billion project. does this help us figure out how complex it will be? how much will it cost? what will we learn out of the shared study that will help us determine what the seawall khal -- challenges are for us? >> i feel with experts in the room i should defer to the two project managers on this one. >> good evening, commissioners. i'm mark birman, project manager for the core of engineers. it's a great question. we would like to think as we enter into the feasibility study we aren't just trying to figure out whether the corps has a federal interest, but we want to be part of a planning effort that helps understand the problem and understands working with the community and the port and the city, what's the best way to solve that problem and so we have a very daunting challenge. we have sea level rise. a lot of uncertainty associated
with seismic risk. we have heard about the heavily used waterfront, it was really enlightening to hear how complicated it is to manage the waterfront and how all those pieces are going to tie into what the corps does along with the port and city. what we will learn from the study is, we like to bring everyone to the table. we will have stakeholder involvement and ultimately our feasibility report will recommend a federal investment that may or may not be part of the local plan, if the locals prefer a separate plan bigger, different than what the corps would based on our own theories and guidance, that could be done as well and recommended for construction with some exemption requests to process. >> i think we are just trying to figure out how to get our arms tactically around what
this challenge is for us over time. we know it's big and will take a lot of time. some numbers have been thrown out but still a moving target for us. i'm just hoping each study we do is helping us get more form, more substance a little more certainty what we have to do. >> mr. birman could you help us understand how you describe flood risk. i think that will help us understand and how you look at current flood risk. >> we will consider all of the available data that we have. high tide, sea level scenarios, the corps uses previous scenarios to determine future risk. california coast as well. we have our national economic development account which is how we consider the damage that occurs relative do flooding. so when we project flooding to occur in the city, damages to b.a.r.t., muni, to the port infrastructure, we will analyze
that and determine what the without project future damages would be if the corps did nothing. we will compare to the benefits of the project, from small non structural solutions to larger seawalls beyond the current perimeter, so we would consider a whole suite of alternatives and compare the cost of those projects to the benefits gained by implementation. >> thank you. commissioner gilman? >> i just want to thank everyone for the report, it was really enlightening, i'm looking forward to the study. i'm curious, did you do any other data analysis with other areas? >> we are doing a lot of work right now in particular with new york, new york m.t.a. and understanding the effects of that storm with the infrastructure, corps of engineers.
we have been meeting almost weekly, and we have a meeting next week about sandy and how we could prevent sandy here. >> thank you very much. >> commissioner makras? >> i guess this is more to the executive director. it's a $3 million commitment, $1.5 million from ourselves. >> we are making a $1.5 commitment and they are matching for total $3 million project for the study. >> was that contemplated in the last budget or is this new money we are looking at? >> we were awarded $5 million from the state for the seawall and we will use those funds for this purpose and the remainder of funds we will utilize for the seawall, earthquake safety project. >> i would like to add because the general investigation process for the corps is on the kind of scale that we need, had
we not been lucky enough to get a start we were looking at alternative paths to try to work out the study ourselves, i think we had been operating on this assumption we may be in for the whole $3 million. very practical and financial -- >> [off mic] >> i want to thank everyone for their patience this evening. and i really want to thank dudley. we are extremely lucky to have a partnership with the corps of engineers. from washington to san francisco. it's because of dudley and all of his work and all his effort
we were able to get where we were. especially with the meeting n.d.c. he got sick and couldn't join us with, but he had us well prepared. from that we got selected. we are so fortunate and so fortunate to work with such a wonderful team and i know this is just the start. i know there's more to come. so i am definitely looking forward to the study and our next steps to secure our seawall. >> all in favor? aye. >> resolution 18 46 has been approved. >> item 13 b request approval to amend contract number 2790 marine structural project iv with power engineering construction company to increase contract amount by $3,211,575 to include the pier
29 sub structure repair scope of work, resulting in an amended contract amount of $10,045,000 and authorize a contract contingency fund of 10% for total authorization of $11,049,500. >> commissioners, thank you for your time today. i hope i'm not disrespectful but if you are any place you want me to pick up the pace, i would be more than happy to. >> [off mic] >> let's just move forward. anybody have any questions? can i have a motion? >> i make a motion.
>> is there a second? >> can we have public comment? come on up. >> we are the subcontractor on this project and doing this along with power engineering. we have a good relationship and looking forward to the commission approving the change order so we can continue. we brought in two local hire from city built and continuing to teach these young men what it means to be a pile driver, so having more opportunity to chip away at our pier and rebuild is is a good thing for their learning and our bottom line. we look forward to approval of
this agenda item. >> commissioners, are there any questions? all in favor? aye. resolution 1847 has been approved. >> item 14. under new business, i have the sfmta will come back to us in october along with port staff to provide an update as to the plan for increasing safety along the embarcadero with a focus on near-term safety and update on the embarcadero enhancement project. also based on the comments i heard as it related to the waterfront land use plan i suggest a separate plan for 30, we have plans for 32, finally we will be asking the fisherman's wharf cbd to come back and update bring more local serve and uses to fisherman's wharf when it's
deemed appropriate. is there any other new business? >> any other new business? >> the answer can come [off mic] i was just curious to see if we take our whole waterfront, if people are cruising on the bay and want to stop and come to the city for restaurants, how many locations could they stop at? >> dock at? that's a good question and we have a good answer. >> [off mic] >> yes. we have been working, actually, a lot internally on our berthing. we have a good answer for you, and i would like to schedule an item on that topic. >> a difference between drop-off versus having to berth for a period of time. somebody's own boat and want to berth for a couple hours. >> yes and we will expand this
informational item, to expand opportunities in berth as well. >> great. >> great. any other new business? any public comment on any business? seeing none, could i have a motion to adjourn? >> i make a motion to adjourn. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> meeting adjourned. [adjourned] -
>> san francisco is known worldwide for its atmospheric waterfront where spectacular views are by piers and sight and sounds are xhanl changing we come to the here for exercise relax ball games entertainment, recreation market, exhilaration a wide variety of contributions easily enjoyed look up the bay the waterfront is boosting for activities boosting over 25 visitors every year the port of san francisco
manages 7 may have million dollars of waterfront from hyde street and fisherman's wharf to the cargo terminals and name shoreline the architecture like pier 70 and the ferry building is here for the embarcadero and a national treasure the port also supports 10 different maritime industries alongside with the recreational attractions making san francisco one of the most viable working waterfronts in the world but did you think that our waterfront faces serious challenges if earthquake to damage the seawall and the embarcadero roadway rising seawalls will cause flooding at high tides and major repairs to
a safe many of the piers the port is at a critically turnl point time to plan for the future of san francisco's waterfront this year the port is updating it's marts plan the plan working group to invite a wide variety of poichdz from the city and bayview and other advisory teams to share their expertise if intense and maritime operations the waterfront land use plan has guided the use and development of the lanes for the last 20 years major physical changes take place along the waterfront and now is the time to update the waterfront plan to continue improvements that will keep our waterfront vibrate, public and resilient the biggest challenges facing
the waterfront are out the site an aging seawall along the embarcadero roadway and seawalls that will rise by 21 hundred to provide and productivity of tides seawall is built over weak soils and mud the next earthquake will cause it to settle several feet without the urgent repairs that will damage the promenade and other things we've been fortunate over the last hundred years less than one foot of seawall over the next hundred years scientists say we'll have 6 feet of seawall rise imagine the pier 30/32 will be floated, the embarcadero will be flooded our transportation system is fog to be heavy impacts unfortunately, the port didn't
have the financial resources to repair all the deteriorating piers let alone the adaptations for sea level rise. >> it is clear that the port can't pay for the seawall reinforcement or deal with the sea level rise on its own needs to raise money to take care of the properties at take care of the maintenance on the properties no way absent anti funding the issues of sea level rise or the schematic conditions of seawall can be development. >> as studies talk about the seawall challenges the working group is look at the issues please come share our ideas about recreation, pier activities, shoreline habitat, historic preservation and transportation issues and viral
protection. >> we know this planning process will not have one question and one answer we need the diversity of the opinions how people feel about san francisco waterfront and want to hear all the opinions. >> the challenges call for big decisions now is the time to explore now and creative ideas to protect and preserve san francisco waterfront. >> now is the time to get involved to help to shape the future of our waterfront. >> we need the debate please come forward and engage in the process. >> this is your waterfront and this is your opportunity to get involved be part of solution help san francisco create the waterfront we want for the future. >> this is really to dream big and i think about what our waterfront looked like for all san franciscans today and generations to come. >> get involved with the planning process that will set
are also diverse and fascist as the people that inhabitable them we're in north beach about supervisor peskin will give us a tour and introduce is to what think of i i his favorite district 5 e 3 is in the northwest surrounded by the san francisco bay the district is the boosting chinatown oar embarcadero financial district fisherman's wharf exhibit no. north beach telegraph hill and part of union square. >> all of san francisco districts are remarkable i'm honored and delighted to represent really whereas with an the most intact district got chinatown, north beach
fisherman's wharf russian hill and knob hill and the northwest waterfront some of the most wealthier and inning e impoverished people in san francisco obgyn siding it is ethically exists a bunch of tight-knit neighborhoods people know he each other by name a wonderful placed physically and socially to be all of the neighborhoods north beach and chinatown the i try to be out in the community as much as and i think, being a the cafe eating at the neighborhood lunch place people come up and talk to you, you never have time alone but really it is fun hi, i'm one the owners and is ceo of cafe trespassing in north beach many people refer to cafe trees as a the living room of north beach most of the clients are
local and living up the hill come and meet with each other just the way the united states been since 1956 opposed by the grandfather a big people person people had people coming since the day we opened. >> it is of is first place on the west that that exposito 6 years ago but anyone was doing that starbuck's exists and it created a really welcoming pot. it is truly a legacy business but more importantly it really at the take care of their community my father from it was formally italy a fisherman and that town very rich in culture and music was a big part of it guitars and sank and combart in the evening that tradition they brought this
to the cafe so many characters around here everything has incredible stories by famous folks last week the cafe that paul carr tennessee take care from the jefferson starship hung out the cafe are the famous poet lawrence william getty and jack herb man go hung out. >> they work worked at a play with the god fathers and photos he had his typewriter i wish i were here back there it there's a lot of moving parts the meeting spot rich in culture and artists and musicians epic people would talk with you the budget and finance sub-committee. today is july 26th. we're waiting for sfgov-tv to catch