tv Government Access Programming SFGTV September 16, 2018 1:00am-2:01am PDT
and trails plan to ensure these eight parks would be designed and developed comprehensively from the park down to northside park. northernmost area of the shipyard project. the first step in executing that vision is creation of a unique signage pilot for the entire 1.. we are underway with this effort working collaboratively collaboratively with the port, r.p.b., pg entity, planning department and five points. with that's starts, we configured our development, the grid and the open spaces with an effort to increase open space, public access to public view corridors, periodic public gathering spaces and multiple paths to, from and parallel to the shoreline. onto our development program. we are proposing to build 1500 --dash 1575 new housing units including 25% affordable,
approximately 200,000 square feet of retail, small office, community space and childcare facility. this program allows us to dedicate a new 5-acre park to the city which combined with a rehabilitated india basin open space, will result in a new 11- acre park for the community. plus approximately 3 acres of public open space within the development. this will be supported by 1800 parking spaces, including approximately 225 public spaces for park users. in order to accommodate all of these improvements, we concentrated development towards ennis avenue. tapering down to one-four-story buildings of the water's edge. we have a diverse pedestrian network and traversing the site from creative footpath, to
structure trails linking the site to the adjacent parked and northside park. we also have a robust bike network including a class one grade separated computer -- commuter bike path but just don't go shown here in the heavy turquoise line. it is also our primary retail corridor. about walking through the different areas on our site. you can see them in site view here. i will focus on the big green and the shoreline. although the first light is our main gateway to the project. it is at ennis. it will be a bus stop for the future hunter's point express bus which will come from hunter 's point, stop here, and go straight down town. you can also see here, a direct view into the open space and the public market that will happen how's starch ups, temporary or semipermanent retail to support the public part and the development. there is another view of the open public market and how it
interfaces with the open space. this slide illustrates the cove terrace, which is located -- where it 900 ennis and 700 ennis marriage. this is the pinch point of the site we worked very closely with recreation and parks staff to address the grade and all of the uses that we need to accommodate here. bikes, pedestrian, park and sea level rise. one of the other unique features of the big green is the interface with a private dwelling units. it is one of the few places in the city where residential buildings are immediately adjacent to the park, providing for gradual transition from private, to public space. the park will be layered to provide ecological and functional amenities to the development through the storm water treatment ponds which will seasonally sell and provide a unique habitat and visual experience to park goers.
as discussed, the park will have a diverse trail network including a multiuse recreational path and the park will be sprinkled with sculptures providing periodic surprises and points of interest at the southeast corner of the site, we are proposing a beach with an adjacent kayak launch providing for an active waterfront and linking the site to the kayak launch of the neighbouring park. finally, the shoreline treatment here is unique in that the site is elevated and situated in such a way that there is minimal impact from sea level rise the existing wetlands will accommodate much of the inundation. we have thus created a series of wetlands to allow for habitat migration through the years and we have located all infrastructure above the end of century 100 year flood projection line. finally, the project will be
built in three phases such that with each development stage, we build a commensurate amount of park space. the first phase is a hillside phase which is located on the southwestern sight portion of our site. the middle of the park, encompassing the public market and the stormwater treatment. the second and third phases will be the cove area next which is between griffith and aurelius walker, and the adjacent park space on the flats. with the beach and the additional open space. that concludes my presentation. i am available for questions and i will turn it over to an with o. pw d. -- o. pw d. to -- op dwd to discuss the benefits package and the development agreement. >> thank you.
>> good afternoon commissioners. i am going to provide a brief overview of the development agreement for the project. and as mike -- i'm sorry. as mike at my colleague, john, pointed out, this is also a southern bayfront strategy. we as a framework to guide negotiations for the development agreement. each project is in dirt has been negotiated to the community process needs to lever other -- leverage other investments to the residents of neighbourhoods and i quickly walked through the specific benefits agreed to in this agreement. starting with the affordable housing program. affordable housing plan has been
designated -- designed to facilitate develop much of 25% of all market right residential units built within the project site. they may satisfy this obligation by constructing 139 on site inclusionary units within a market buildings conveying up to three on site inclusionary units -- i'm sorry, conveying up to three development parcels at no cost to an affordable housing developer, for site development of up to 180 below market right units. and by paying an in lieu fee of a maximum 300 market residential units which would yield 75 low income units of site. rate-mac. the remaining 319 below market right units will be built on the 700 ennis and 180 of those will be in partnership with 100% affordable housing developers. the mayor's office of housing
has committed to applying all the in lieu fees generated by the project site to affordable housing projects within district ten and could use these dollars for acquisition of small and large site for rehabilitation. one hundred% affordable construction and rental stabilization for existing low income residents. all of the affordable units are subject to the 40% local preference program to encourage community stability. the next most significant component of this agreement is a commitment to publicly accessible parks and open space. the project proposes a mixed-use development that will include a new network of improved parkland and open space inc. through an urban village. the open space will include a total of 14 acres of publicly accessible parks, plazas, bicycle trails and pedestrian pathways. eleven of those acres will be comprised of existing 6 acres of private land -- of waterfront open space, as well as nearly 6 acres of private lands that will be developed into the big green.
the new park will be dedicated at no cost to the city to become part of the south east waterfront area public parks. once completed kathy's open spaces connect to 1.5 acres. the city has reserved the right to draw up to $750,000 from these dollars over the term of the d.a. to use towards job training in the areas of landscaping, horticulture, sustainable infrastructure and open space management of the project site. like pier 70, the india basin project will also be required as
part of the community benefits project to create a facility. the first funds from this site specific tax will be eligible for the developer to construct infrastructure and public streets. the second funds will be used by the city to address areawide sealevel rise needs. shoreline stabilization and protection of the areas beyond the borders of the project. additional community benefits include the construction of an open air community market and a potential future grocery store. job opportunities for construction and on site jobs, local higher requirements for infrastructure work on existing city streets and parks and an 18 % local enterprise business target as established by the office of contract monitor. they'll make an approximate 10 million-dollar contribution to off site transportation improvement and construct neighbourhood transit, bicycle and pedestrian improvements. the project sponsor will also deliver a 3,000 square-foot worm shall do a certified bayview childcare provider as well as
establish a fund to be used at the sole discretion of the selected childcare provider for tenant improvements, rental subsidy or discounted rates to neighbourhood families for the first eight years of occupancy on the project site. finally, the city reserves an option on 5,000 square feet of commercial space for a possible future community facilities such as a reading room, library or other community space. dot concludes my presentation and i will also be available for any questions. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, now you have had the overview of the project, i will do a quick run through of the documents that would be the port process to approve in conjunction with this transaction being approved over the next month or so. and then i will run through the next steps on the calendar going forward. obviously, as my colleagues have noted and our presenters have noted, we are here to answer questions from there. so the four items here are the items that would come back to the port commission for approval
the consent to development agreements, the approval of a trust exchange agreements, the approval of a declaration of open-space covenant and the delegation of the port process executive director to address the operational requirements. the vacation of the streets were -- we are negotiating right now about the full scope of that that you saw on the map, we want to clean up those streets as well as a trust ownership. in addition, the actual infrastructure plan and the trust consistency of the overall park plan would be before the port commission as part of the consent of the development agreement. the public trust exchange agreement, it describes the
exchange of lands to go in and leave the trust. it would place in the trust 9.5 acres with india basin open space in the future big green state lands. they have asked us to look at 17 additional acres of submerged lands that would also potentially be clarified within the trust. the acceptance of those would be subject to condition of them being remediated to clean up for being brought into the trust. we are beginning to talk with state lands in the project sponsor of the city about the format of that and we will be back with a few specifics as we come back with our next hearing. this trust land would be subject , for clarity, for seasonal wetlands and outfall easements.
we have now clarified a set of lands along the green area along the shoreline that is in the trust in the red and hatched areas that are outside of the trust. they will talk more about the m.o.u. in the moment about how they are managing the liability and responsibility. this declaration, and it would run with the land and cannot be amended or terminated without the consent of the board of supervisors. the memorandum of understanding, we are thinking it is now -- it
may be one or several, but the primary counterparty for the memorandum of understanding as recreation and parks. the park is developed and put into service, they would take over operational responsibilities with courtney on port staff with final plans and crucially the trust consistency determination for any subsequent improvements. a special event permitting will be run through recreation and parks, and then, obviously, the underlying operation and maintenance, repair and assuming liability would also be taken on by the recreation and park under the memorandum of understanding. a couple of other agencies that are also critical, the san francisco public utilities commission that would oversee the construction of any infrastructure to be accepted by s.f. p.u.c. and then then they went except and maintain a structured. public works and the department of building inspection, those entities -- we would like to rely on them for permitting and
construction oversight and acceptance. we are negotiating potential exceptions. our chief engineer recommends looking at the shoreline structures because of the unique expertise in that way, looking at shoreline improvements, et cetera in such a way. the port would be involved in that. again, that is under negotiation and we will come back she was specifics when we have all that mapped out. generally speaking, the goal of the memorandum of understanding is to make sure that the port doesn't have ongoing financial liability going forward. this is a calendar of next steps the development agreement and project itself is before the land use committee next week, september 17th. the full board on september 25 th and october 2nd. other agency approvals will trail that board approval. they are hearing the item on october 9th and art october 18
th we would anticipate the outcome of this discussion to come back to you with the october 23rd meeting for the approvals of the items i just described. that is our presentation. we are welcoming any questions. >> thank you. >> we have public comment. toby? >> do we have a toby? is there any public comment on this item? come on up. you can come up, yolanda. >> hello.
i am not even hear -- you guys need to know that being out in the community is very disrespectful to the tenants. my brother lives across the street from one of their sights. they started before they are supposed to be out there. we have talked to several people , they won't answer your calls and they're rude to the tenants. they are brewed to mostly african-american people. this is not something somebody told me. my brother told me they were doing it and i went out there myself. the people that they have on site are disrespectful to the community. i think if they are awarded
anything and allow to do anything in district ten, there has been more understanding about the people that are on the ground. they need to have a good relationship with the community. but once they touched down, they have no respect for the community. i am asking the board to monitor that and have someone in place who can make sure this doesn't happen. because i have witnessed them at 7:00 am at least ten times. they have been talk to about it, warned about it, and they have no respect to the community. thank you. >> thank you. are there any other public comments on this item? public comment is closed. commissioners?
>> i'm sorry. the commission would need to call you up to ask any questions sorry about that. >> i will call you up. [laughter] >> thank you. i thank you for that. i do want to clarify that i believe this happens all the time. i believe, sorry to yolanda, i believe she is talking about build a group and not build. we are two entirely separate organizations. build group does construction and they are working at pointe shipyard. build inc. is not working on shipyard at all. we do not do our own construction. i just wanted to make that point of clarification for you. >> thank you. ok. thank you very much for this presentation. it seems like we are getting all that -- we are going to the discussion of open space and all of the southern waterfront projects. it has been very informational to learn about a lot of things
that are going on besides just the open spaces. i guess, number 1, it is interesting, that when we think about pier 70 in what we heard earlier with the power station project and india basin, it is the size of the properties that are not too dissimilar. 25-30 acres seems to be -- these are obviously major impacts in terms of the number of housing units, residents. i was curious to no kak what is the projected population for this project coming in in terms of residents and workers? what is expected in this neighbourhood. >> it is similar between 3600 residents and 4200 residents. >> that is not, that is a little bit lower than the other two,
but i guess creating a lot of density, more density than we have had before in the neighbourhood. i guess it is less office. i did not hear as much office but more residential. i guess -- i think that the other thing we emphasized in talking about the other projects , i wasn't sure whether there was any water landing even for recreation anticipated. we talked a lot about -- of this is much further south than the other two that we talked about. so, i guess, in terms of what you are planning for india, on the waterside to -- i'm talking now, not to ferry. water taxi landing, because i think this is probably for the south that you would necessarily anticipate a major water transportation landing of something that would be facilitated and facilitate water transportation. >> we did look at that. however, our site is really shallow. we would have to build a peer really far out to accommodate water taxi. we also were talking to hunter's
pointe shipyard and they are contemplating a water taxi landing not too far from our site on the northern portion of their property. the adjacent india basin at shoreline park has a peer. in order to get far enough out, even to hand towers, they have to go 600 feet out into the water to get deep enough for even that. >> thank you. so the lease term is our typical lease term for the open space? first of all, we have to exchange properties. correctly in and out of the trust because of the barriers. >> this is a little different. we will own the property but the m.o.u. will be limited to the 66 years. >> it will be 66 years. and then, i am not sure i fully understand all the trust exchange of the ins and outs. if you could summarize that again.
i thank you say there is 19 acres that go that go in and some go out. we want to get the land lands to be continuous for the open space is that correct? >> is a total of 14 acres. 9.5 acres will be in the port possessed jurisdiction process jurisdiction after the exchange. >> recreation and park will have full responsibility for maintaining the space? >> the m.o.u. will cover the entire area. >> this is more or less, we are granting a rent-free lease because it is open space. >> yeah. >> that is a fair way to look at it although we own the property. basically, it will be maintained as open space. but it is with recreation and park and not the developer, unlike the other situation. >> ok. that is one of my questions. thank you. >> commissioners? >> on one of your slides you indicated there will be a fund
of $43 million per -- for roads and sea level work. how much of that is a rhodes and how much will go into the fund for sealevel work we. >> the community facility c.f.d. that provides the sealevel rise, the future funding for that pack all of that will be for sealevel rise for the city. there is two separate -- there is a couple of different c.f.d. it allows for $1.5 million that will be used mostly on enhanced maintenance and operations of the open space but can also be used in the public realm on some of the public infrastructure above and beyond what d.p.w. provides. and then the community -- the facility c.f.d., the first funding will be available to the project sponsor for construction
of roads and public open space, and on the second funding in 30 years will be taken by the city for the sealevel rise outside of the boundaries of the project. will be the entire -- entire amount shall be rebounded in 30 years. >> they will rebound for $33 million in 30 years and it's the city who can do what they want with it? >> it is the city. it will be -- but it is designated for sealevel rise, improvements, mitigation, all along the southern shoreline. we haven't even -- we haven't specified a boundary that that money can be used in. it will be used by the city for sealevel rise. both on the creation and park property and property surrounding the area. >> in 30 years that will drop to us as a $43 million as a payment or will it be given to us over time? >> it will be rebonded. we have not yet negotiated the
rma for the c.f.d. that will trail the approvals. once we have gotten through the approvals of the board of supervisors, we will then work with the project developer in the city and family as well to negotiate the terms of the actual c.f.d. >> ok. great, thank you very much. great presentation today. >> actually, can you come back up? my questions are for you and the public his -- project sponsor. i know these questions might seem late in the game, so i apologize that their briefing is coming -- >> we are going to be continue to the 24th. >> ok. i was a little surprised by the affordability mix. can you walk me through the rationale why they're so little on site -- you are dedicating
parcels on the block, but mixed in with market right development it seemed a little low to me. i was wondering what the rational was for that. >> so the on-site mac -- out of 394 units total, 319 of them will be on the project site. i'm not sure if that is what you're asking me. >> didn't you say 139 would be -- >> no, there would be 139 inclusionary throughout the buildings and then in addition to that, there is three parcels on site that the project sponsor can dedicate to dedicate to a nonprofit developer. that will yield a total of 180 units on site. and then the third way they can satisfy that obligation is by paying an end legal fee of a total of 300 market right which would yield approximately 75 off-site units. >> i guess i am addressing the inclusionary throughout the
property. how many overall market right units without -- market rate units will there be? >> total units on site or 1,575. >> ok. >> i'm just curious, how many physical buildings will that be and? a rough guess. >> twenty. >> twenty. ok. i am just curious why, out of 1,575, only 139 of them are going to be intermingled as affordable? >> they can satisfy their obligation, there below market rate housing obligation by pulling any one of those levers. it could be there will be more inclusionary. the two things we have capped is the off-site at 75 and the dedicated particles -- parcels at 180. if they determined they want to build a market right mac building on one of those parcels that they could possibly dedicate to, that will have
inclusionary and it rather than 100% affordable. we are trying to get as broad a mix as possible of low income, middle income that makes the most sense for the area. and with an average a.m.i. across the site of rental at 100 % and of for sale at 110%. the average across the sights. >> ok. i know we are not the planning commission. a lot of this is decisions at the port has made when it has had opportunities to do development, looking at pier 70, mission rock, 88 broadway, that we really want to see affordable housing and we want to contribute to the crisis --dash we don't want to contribute to the crisis of space that is facing the city. i want to encourage a developer -- i heard a little bit about -- from the community that folks are really looking to see a lot more inclusionary dispersed versus dedicated parcels, even though i know it is in the geographic footprint but there
is an interest in seeing more of that. wanted to articulate that is something i heard. there is no one here from public comments. i was also curious about how you were looking to partner with a nonprofit developer if you go to the parcels -- if you would -- if you were to do an r.f.p. and select nonprofit partners, since our developers in the bayview. i wanted to understand what your process is about that. >> we have identified two relatively small sites of about 25-38 units each that we would like to partner with habitat for humanity on. to develop for sale, affordable housing units for low, 30-80% a.m.i. and in the third parcel, we just started talking to affordable housing developers. we will continue the outreach
process. not sure if we will do a formal r.f.p. but we will solicit proposals from a number of different affordable housing providers. >> i would just say these things for the public record, urged that there are developers that are bayview district tenant based. they are the smaller of our community of affordable housing developers. sometimes because of that, they are not afforded the opportunity to do public partnerships that are not done to a former -- formal r.f.p. process. i want to encourage you to look to those developers and see those who are in district tenant bayview based that have partnered with other folks to make sure the community is respected in your project. >> one hundred%. i agree with you. we have begun talking to one such local developer about a possibility there.
>> great presentation. i bet you feel like you are home in the old days. having you here is great. you are eloquent and you make it so simple. it is really amazing to me, this whole day, we have talked a lot about parks. i think we can have more parks in this city than any city in the united states it seems. i think that that is good. i really like what you were talking about with the job training, the jobs, the hiring, the locals, and what i find really exciting about this is what we are building a new safety within our own city. this is really exciting times. i am really proud of san francisco. i think we are taking the lead in affordable housing. this is a thing, that it seems like no matter what you do, i really want to know a bit more about the public trust, but it
seems like we are moving in the right direction. i think to give director forbes the goal to negotiate with the different agencies, i support that. i just want to say to yolanda, i hope that if you got disrespected by anybody, in this commission, we don't like that kind of behaviour. i am really sorry if something happened to you. >> the community is very sensitive. >> )-right-parenthesis. >> thank you. thank you. >> thank you. we understand. i just wanted to say that. thank you for the presentation. i am looking forward to you coming back and i think this is a great project. thank you. >> thank you so much for the presentation. this is a wonderful project. back to the trust rock right now , we have about 3 acres in
this area. and we are going to acquire another 6.5. will have 9.5 acres. that we are taking on. >> that is correct. >> what happens, if, for some reason, this project doesn't move forward? >> we are negotiating the terms of the trust exchange right now, but basically, one of the conditions for the exchange of property is the m.o.u. being in place, assuming those obligations. so that if the trust exchange happens, we will have the relationship with the other departments to manage all the operational capabilities. i think we also want to be confident -- of the thing about it, once this project is entitled to, it has a level of value and is moving forward. like our projects, we want to catch the cycle. i think we are working out what are the right constraints around when the property can transfer.
there is an interest, broadly, in reconciling the trust. the question is, when did that happen in relation to it being proved. we have our interest in making sure those things go as close together as we can. >> what is the cost of this part >> about $20 million approximately. >> and build is paying for the part? >> yes. [laughter] >> build is paying for the park. [laughter] >> we will make sure that all funds are accounted for and the park will be developed while we do this. right? >> i think the swap will happen
before the construction happens. it is a question of how close in time can we get to make sure that we know -- >> it will be tied to the funding. >> build is obligated under the agreement to deliver the park. >> and they could go bankrupt tomorrow. i just want to make sure that we are not stuck with nine a half acres of land that we are now responsible for maintaining. i just want there to be whatever needs to be put in place to make sure that we have no liability, no responsibility. >> i have ideas about what you are saying. let me go back and we will talk about it. we will describe those mechanisms. it is something that has been a source of what is the right timing and what is the right source of funds including the service issue that we talked about. i think your point is well taken and we can draw the picture more quickly. there is going to be a point in time where it hasn't been built yet, but it is the right time
because it is about to be built. i think we want to have the right milestones in that trust exchange agreement to know that when that happens and they are about to send the bulldozers out , that is when we get the trust exchange. >> i also noticed i did not see the advisory committee that was briefed on this. i. i would really like to know their thoughts on this project. prior to you coming back. >> commissioners, i was working on this project earlier when we last reported to the commission. we did go to the southern waterfront advisory committee that was some time ago. we did go to them and they were supportive of the entire project and it's whole, including the participation of the port to accommodate the new open space. i cannot recall whether we went to the central waterfront advisory group or not but we have the opportunity to go there
>> i just want to update both of them on where we are. >> we will. >> thank you, very much. >> the development agreement is for 15 years? >> the initial term is 17 years and to then the developer has the option to add eight years onto that if they are completely in compliance with everything and the city would have to agree with that. the initial term is 17 years. >> a someone who has seen some get entitled in government agreements and then the project sets for a whole variety of regent just reasons, i want to reiterate what they said about -- so we don't do the exchange too early and have liability. for when you come back to us, think about that and knowing know the terms of the development and the extension, i would like to see some of these things tied to those as well so we don't do the swap and have the discussion too early.
>> this is a similar problem. when will the park be completed and turned over? are they doing the park at the end? that is always the question. that leads right into where you are at. >> the development project itself has identified three phases. they have to come forward with a phase application for each phase of the project. as courtney pointed out in her presentation, the expectation is that each phase will have to have all of its required infrastructure around it and tied to each phase is a portion of the project. >> ok. >> thank you. are there any other comments? >> i just have one last comment. this rolls into 12 b. but just to put a focus, the developer shared that 9.5 acres,
if you want to say of open space and parks, around approximately $20 million. >> 26.5 acres. >> know she is saying the cost of the park is 20 million. >> i would just like those numbers to be viewed by everyone when we go to 12 b. >> thank you so much for this presentation. >> thank you. >> authorization to record -- reward contract to support services in an amount not to go over $2 million. >> good afternoon, commissioners
the agent before you is an action item to award the technical support services contract for pier 70 and mission rock the most qualified and highest ranked proposal to the port's request for proposals issued on may 31st. the amount of the proposed contract is $2,400,000. this project complies with a number of our port wide strategic goals including proactively reading -- working with agency partners to ensure integrated transportation plans to ease traffic congestion on the waterfront and provide parks , housing and facilities for the arts. it includes prioritizing pier 70 and mission rock developments to include vibrant new communities
and helps -- the development projects in pier 70 and mission rock are in the implementation phases. they will be going through extensive planning, engineering and construction activities in the next few years. the underlying agreements with the respective developers of these projects allow the port to contract a third party to support staff with officially filling their obligations. the port is required to review and issue permits and coordinate the review of engineered submissions by other departments and facilitate the purchase and acquisition of infrastructure. the scope of work under the proposed contract includes facilitating the interdepartmental cooperation agreement process on behalf of the port, review of submission with respect to the port's proprietary role in permitting,
advising the port on infrastructure issues, and providing constructive feedback on recommendations, troubleshooting and resolving plan review comments. there is a detailed summary of the project scope and your staff report beginning on page 2. the project manager is here and prepared to provide additional specifics about the scope of services at the conclusion of this presentation. the r.f.p. was advertised on may 31st, 2018. the help of tiffany from the engineering commission, we created a webpage that featured the r.f.p., infrastructure plans for pier 70 and mission rock, along with the signage sheets from our proposal meetings. and answers to the r.f.p. questions and all of the r.f.p. and corresponding submittal documents. on june 13th, we hosted a pre submittal conference in this room to review the r.f.p. terms and to provide a networking opportunity for potential respondents. given the specialized nature of the contract services, we are pleased 30 individuals attended
the conference. we convened a three-member evaluation and the members included a senior project manager from the mayor process office of economic and workforce development. a senior project with the office of community investment in infrastructure and the port's chief operating officer. minimum qualifications are often barriers to small local firms bidding on city contracts. whenever possible, we strive to develop minimum development criteria that is inclusive to firms at the contractor levels. the purpose of this solicitation were a five year experience and support services.
on july 20th, the proposal deadline, we received three responses to the r.f.p., all three firms met the r.f.p. minimum qualifications in all three firms were certified. the final rankings are shown on the slide. the city administrative code, chapter 14 b. and to the l.b.e. on nondiscrimination contracting ordinance establishes discounts for certified local firms. all three firms are minority business enterprises and are entitled to a ten% rating bonus. the top ranked written proposal score obtains the highest score in the oral interview phase. no protests were received on the five day protest. for professional service contracts over $110,000, the monitoring division head l.b.e.
requirements based on the availability of l.b.e. firms. they set at 23% l.b.e. subtracting -- subcontracting goal for this project. they exceeded the 23% subcontracting goal by committing to subcontract 54% of the overall contract to certify at local firms. when combined with the 46% of work that the consulting performed, 100% of the proposed contract will be completed by small local san francisco businesses. a firm will be performing 38% of the contract work. they will be working on civil engineers. minority business firm will provide four% of the overall scope and to obe firms will perform the balance of the contract.
we are very pleased to bring a team before you for contract awarding us 100% l.b.e. holland his consulting, the highest proposer kick, as a minority-owned reporter on thirl waterfront. they specialize specialized in planning, permitting and delivering of horizontal infrastructure. they are inexperienced and prime and subcontractor services. they currently serve as a subcontractor. they provide infrastructure permitting support at the hunter 's point shipyard redevelopment, treasure island develop meant and the redevelopment of candlestick points. point. they come highly recommended. their team is 100% comprised of l.b.e. firms. guy hollands is here from hollands consulting and. cooper, the project manager was here earlier but had to leave. they will be here to answer any questions if you have any about their scope of work.
>> this project is fully funded by developer reimbursements in the waterfront development project fund. if you prove this contract of work today, will issue the notice of proceeding in october and anticipate precedent -- completion in 2022. in conclusion, we respectfully request that you award support services for their peers 70 contract to haul in consulting and the amount of $2,400,000 in a contract term of four years and the option to extend down to that contract of one year. that concludes my presentation. we are available to answer any questions. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? no public comment. no? motion? >> so moved. >> second. >> public comment? seeing none, commissioner gelman
>> thank you for the presentation. it was really nice to see. since it has been an issue that i have heard resonate at every commission i have been at around local higher and l.b.e. it is nice to see that this proposal has all of that. i am generally supportive on what to say thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> i support the item. >> thank you. i guess my question is not related to the consulting firm. i appreciate we do have an l.b.e. and someone who we have worked with and is recommended. in looking at it again, i know you presented this for us to approve the r.f.p., all the items that they have been providing as, have we not had consultants that worked on this before? is this the first time we have put all of this?
just a little bit more and the need for it in terms of having an outside resource versus our own resources. >> sure. i will defer to the project manager, but just quickly, this project scope is dedicated specifically to a special use at pier 70 and mission rock. >> sorry we say that again. i didn't hear you. >> this contract is dedicated specifically to the special use district at mission rock and pier 70. i will defer to the project manager on the need for the scope. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm the project manager for the port. this contract is a very important strategic contract for the port's delivery of our obligations to the developer's for these -- for the developers of these projects.
we are now entering into a very important phase of implementation where we have active construction and we have just developed or entered into the contract with the giants for mission rock. the workflow right now is exceeding and growing dramatically. we need the outside help of consultants to help move these projects forward and deliver on our obligations. >> ok. i guess because we do have a certain headcount limitation, but if we had others, would we have -- since these projects are ongoing for long periods of time , would we preferred to have internal resources? >> i would argue, not. because of the broad swath of expertise here from mapping, to the streets and utilities, to
land-use transfers. there's a lot of very deep expertise and we have two big development projects underway with lots of acreage. i think staffing up for this range of expertise would not be in our best interest. i think here we just want the consultant services, regardless of whether or not we could bring in an internal f.t.e. >> than the question on the tenure of why we chose for years >> that was designed to time out with the phase one of both projects which are expected to be three years for the horizontal development and the mission rock project is lagging by about a year. that would be about the four-year term. >> ok. >> we wanted to have consistency and we wanted to have a team involved from the beginning to the end. >> so we are, i guess you mentioned it, we are reimbursed by the developer for these costs
so if they should, for some reason, get delayed and keep going and the contract gets extended, the developer is funding this. >> yes. in addition, it is as -- and as needed contract. the budget has no ceiling or floor. we will issue task orders as needed along the way over that four or five year period. >> otherwise the build gets bigger and bigger. ok. thank you. >> commissioner i have -- >> i will speak in support. >> why thank you. [laughter] >> thank you so much for this presentation. >> i'm not done, president brandon. [laughter] >> thank you. thank you to everyone.
this has been coming up a lot and i support this. i wanted to say thank you. thank you president brandon. [laughter] >> thank you, of course. this is a wonderful presentation it looks like our community open houses are working. i want to commend the staff on having 100% lpe project. this is a first for us. it is great to put our local businesses to work. thank you. >> thank you. >> all in favour? >> aye. >> resolution. 1850 has passed. >> age of 12 b., informational presentation on the status of pier 70 park project. >> good afternoon commissioners. president brandon, and vice president. i'm here with planning and environment. i am joined tonight by erica peterson, the new project manager from port engineering for the park. i also wanted to recognize the
port senior staff that has provided a lot of support in developing this presentation and the staff report. including director forbes, kt, diane, irene and rod cox who has provided a lot of support in creating this presentation. the purpose of the presentation this afternoon is to provide their commission with the history of the project, including the cost estimating, the funding, and the budgeting. the facing of the project throughout his time over the last ten years. there are three large issues i'm hoping to convey as part of this presentation along with erica process support. one is the park project work it is more than just a park. we have a sediment up. we have 19th and georgia street and we have a parking lot as well. the second is that when we started this project, we knew the scope of the project and the
funding of the project would evolve over time. we started in 2011 after the success of the 2008 bond and the 2012 -- 2012 bond was in front of us and we are confident we would get additional funding from that. and then lastly, throughout the duration of the project where we have presented numerous times to the commission, and going through the research to develop the presentation, and reliving the last ten years of this project, it is easy to recognize that while we have communicated consistently to the commission, not all of our communications developing -- regarding the funding have been explicit. i want to recognize our shortcomings i want to go through a timeline of the project we will go over how the funding and budgets have evolved
over time. starting in 2008 greets joined with recreation and parks with the 2008 clean and safe general obligation bonds. the bond was successful in the port received 33 and a half million dollars, of which 22 and a half million dollars was designated to the blue-green wait projects. right off the bat, there were three projects that got prioritized. the park expansion, the mission bay shoreline project and planning to determine how the blue-green way projects would look, feel and be programmed across the board. through that process, working with the community and the commission, we were going to identify how would we expend those 2008 funds between the park, warm water cove park and the slave? project. jumped to 2011, we sold our first bond.
the blue-green way planning was sufficiently complete. we went out to request bids from consultants to help us with the park planning and we had just been wrapping up the preferred master plan for all of pier 70. when we went out to bid for a consultant service pack port staff estimated the total project cost of $30 million that was based on comparable projects and some back of the envelope due diligence. at that point in time, we secured $10 million and the project had not included the parking lot, 19th and georgia street to, or a sediment up. we selected a consultant team. this slide shows what the overall schedule was. we looked at beginning
construction in 2014. we retained them to do park master planning and cost estimates for the total area of the park. we are going to go into detail design and bid an award for construction. the planning and design his gradual is an enlargement of the green phase and that is where we had awarded the company to do. for its existing conditions and opportunities and constraints. to improve the due diligence we had done for the preferred master plan and planning. develop alternative park master plan concepts, developed a draft plan and phasing plan, again, our estimate was $30 million. we knew that we did not have $30 million so we had to work with the consultants who had a cost estimator on board to determine how we will spend the funding we have in place. how will we scale the project based on the funding that we have in place. and then finally, identification