tv Government Access Programming SFGTV March 1, 2019 2:00pm-3:01pm PST
you said, be continued. >> chair fewer: would the meeting of march 13 work for you? that's two weeks from now. >> supervisor haney: that would be great, yeah. >> chair fewer: so i make a motion to move this item to the meeting of march 13. >> clerk: for clarification, both items? >> chair fewer: yes, both items, 19 and 20. thank you, supervisor haney. madam clerk, are there any other items before us today? >> clerk: there are no other items. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. the meeting is adjourned. [gavel]
any items not listed on the agenda. is there public comment? item 6, executive directors report. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm the board's executive director. first i'd like to update you on the land sale of parcel k north you'll likely recall from our approval for pier 70 now brookfield development on february 12 following the board of supervisors on the sale of parcel k north. the first transaction for vertical development under the pier 70 district. the port received total consideration of $24.35 million and transferred the net proceeds to brookfield to begin entitlement cost pursuant to the development and greet -- agreement for the 28 acre site and it will undergo construction
and the port will participate in the subsequent sale of condominium units. the buyer, tmg, presidio bay and brookfield plans 250 condo units to be built in two phases and anticipate starting construction next year. i want to congratulation the port team who worked long weekends on a record speed sale. very record speed transaction for us. the key members and this land sale improved the sale from pier 70 down the road. wail we may not be to see it we will thank christine for the revenues. also congratulations to tmg for
completing their first successful transaction with the board. second item is the pier 70 design review. the partner brookfield develop. port and city are moving expeditiously with a new neighborhood at pier 70. it's terrific to the progress on the ground we now have a design proposal for e2 on the northeast corner of mayorland and 22nd street in the pier 70 special use district. design review for the building is assigned to the city's planning director john ram, nevertheless, i want the port commission and our water front community to be aware of the review process and proposed schematic design. i'd like to invite david volpray up as a senior designer of the plan. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'll talk about the process and maybe by the time i'm done we'll have images for you.
port staff and planning staff recommend the schematic design for e2 parcel at pier 70. this is the first new building in pier 70 in several decade. the -- decades. the program is apartment, residential building 70 feet tall, 226,000 square feet with 275 rental units. brookfield submitted their schematic design to the city and the planning department in october of 2018 port and planning department staff team reviewed the submittal for completeness and deemed it complete december 2018. brookfield and the city planning department and port met to review jointly and independently
the design for the schemmatic design and they presented to the dog patch neighborhood association and portrero boosters and brookfield and their architectural design team redesigned to address port and planning comments received through the water front group and dog patch neighborhood and boosters. in reference to the submittal port staff recommend the planning director approve the schematic design. a staff report with the review design is post those opposed planning department's website for the public to review the staff report and designs. the planning director has 20 days to approve or disapprove the schematic design. we can go over the images of the
report on and cox back. >> the -- come back. the next item is on the ward. the spurs good government award have recognized good job performance for those serving the city of san francisco and acknowledged top manage gers for their leadership and ability to make a difference. this year's awardees includes our own dian oshima and her aweird celebrates her efforts in adoption of the first water front plan in 1997 following the passage of proposition h and
leading the effort to update the plan with 160 recommendations and demonstrate top quality and connects well with a broad and diverse public ch -- which sometimes have competing views and was undertake thee effort fr the second time and first time and invests on how port and port staff can improve and doesn't take umbrage at constructive feedback to improve the team and port. diane has a way to make everyone understand they're part of the solution. she's the first to credit others for the result and sure she will
at the awards ceremony including her volunteers but she is a guiding spirit who brought us together through their efforts the port is able to provide a vision for the port's future that we can implement. she has been able to create real collaboration and is genuinely open to receiving and processing feedback of all kinds not just on a superficial level but with intention to understand, listen and understand without conflicting opinions. the waterfront has evolved into an essential part of the city's identity. 20 million people visit our waterfront every year. many dynamic people have contributed to its success and she is the principle author of the cooperation and public involvement necessary for a world class public waterfront. congratulations, to you, diane we can't wait to celebrate with
you at the city hall. congratulations. now i'll bring david back up. >> thank you, commissioners. so highlighted in bright yellow is parcel e2 in the pier 70 district on marilyn and 22nd street. this is looking down at the western facade of the building along marilyn street. here's the western facade looking along marilyn street further down.
with the courtyard area. and the 22nd street looking west along the south facade of the building where it meets. >> thank you, david. staff and i ask the port commission asked to close the meeting in the late public defender jeff hagachi and was a fierce defender of the most marginalized people in san francisco. we miss him terribly. our hearts go out to his family and friends and the staff who will have to carry on. that concludes my report.
>> i wanted to thank you for the kind words but it only works if i can accepted on behalf of the organization. particularly people who came to all the public discussions and my team. you could have broadened the engagement. i think there's 5,000 flowers of inputs and perspectives that have been woven together. i'd like to particularly call out the waterfront plan team because it was a long professional and they really deserved to be recognized and
david read them well and a special shout-out to ann cooke and carrie killstrom to help on the effort and they've been instrumental and to others in particular. it's a team effort with support staff from every division and the team was strong with strong leadership from all three of the committees. thanks very much and it's a celebration for everyone. >> congratulations.
>> item 6b, port commissioners' report. >> i want to make a few comments. i think the award represents multiple things. i think of you and the waterfro waterfront is like the conductor of the orchestra and it take a strong conductor and i think that's the role you play. it was a huge team effort i also think accepting the award from spur which is a highly recognized organization and we are a role model for how we'd like governance and the and the agency to operate. from that standpoint elaine, you also deserve credit for leading the organization and i think we
can raise the recognition on a broader level. i think the land use exceeded all of our expectations and all the leadership and amazing we had many diverse voices. and no recommendation was going to go forward without unanimous consent and it forced everyone to come together to see everything as one not as just what my individual opinion was on anything in particular. i think it's a great effort and representationation of the unity which we don't see all the time in san francisco and this was a success. i think we all should celebrate that. thank you.
>> on the consent calendar is a resolution authorizing the memorandum of understanding with the san francisco public utilities commission for the installation and acceptance and operation of certain utility facility support master plan projects without paying rent resolution number 1907. >> second. >> is there public comment on the consent calendar? seeing none, public comment is closed. all in favor? resolution passes. >> item 7a informational on operation and programming at the eco jump shot at heron's head park and proposed memorandum for information with san francisco recreation and parks department for use of port property at the eccee center at her on's head park. >> good afternoon,
commissioners. i'm in the port's planning and environment division. happy to be here this afternoon to present to you about heron's park and the eco center. i am joined by colleagues from san francisco recreation and parks department sarah madeline and the director of policy of public affairs. and the youth services and volunteer manage for heron's park. they'll be available after my presentation. they'll be here for questions after my presentation and i'd like to provide background about the heron's head park. the land is comprised of the
land fa filled the bay in the 1970s the intent to create another terminal. in 1977 approximately the port decided it doesn't need another cargo terminal and it ceased construction. debate between the port and bcdc arose which were ultimately settled with the port's agreement to design and seek funding for a wetland habitat restoration and park which we did do. in 1999, the site formerly referred to as pier 98 re-opened has heron's head park and it's north of the former hunter's point power plant site. can see in the aerial photo
there's a lot of open space which is now operated by a non-profit organization referred to as hunter's point now. it's for community programming through pg&e. in 2005 it was approached for literacy for environmental justice who became a port tenant and they constructed the eco center at heron's park. it was referred to as the living classroom. the intention being it would provide a space for community gathering and environmental
education. they constructed it with the fund from san francisco state conservancy and donors and many volunteers who participated in the construction of the eco center. the eco center is a truly unique building. this is the first class building and remains the only platinum building in san francisco. it's also a zero net energy building meaning it generates net energy from renewable sources to compensate for meet its own energy demand. it's considered an off-the-grid building. it's only connection in infrastructure is the potable water supply so the water for drinking and for the sinks is
from p.u.c. but everything else operates independent from utilities. it was also intended to be a demonstration project of green building techniques so that people in the community and really throughout the region could see how green building would operate on a residential or small scale. it features 100% solar power. rain water capture and reuse on the part that is not solar panels an made of sustainable building materials surrounded by all-native landscaping and includes on-site waste water treatment systems. so water from the sinks and toilets is treated in the system contained within the building using the same biological practice as the wetlands use to
clean water in san francisco bay. and at the end of the treatment system, the water that comes out meets water quality standards for recreational water contact, meaning you could swim in it, though you wouldn't, but you could. since 2010, actually, since the park opened, the court has been providing environmental education and volunteer programs at heron's head park. we were inspired by feedback we got from the community when we first designed and opened the park that to be an asset, you needed to be activated and we needed to engage the surrounding community in the care and stewardship of the park. so we have been doing that for the last 20 years through various mechanisms. we tried hiring port staff and contracted with local community
organizations. partnering with city college of san francisco which used to operate in center for habitat restoration and then beginning in 2010 started offering the environmental education and volunteer programs through a partnership with recs and park and that has proven to be the most stable and functional mechanisms that we tried. so rec and park operates different programs at heron's park. one is the youth stewardship program. under the youth stewardship program they hire amenicorp young adults usually recent college graduates who work for an annual stipend and work for a year in service to the community capacity. the young stewardship interns work with local schools and other organizations to provide education about the ecology and
environment at heron's head park. the functions and ecological values of wetlands and the affiliated native plant landscaping. so that's been going on for almost 10 years. they work mostly with k-12 schools and all other kinds of groups that want to come out to heron's head park to learn with the environment. and rec and park also in 2012 initiated the green acres program which is a program for young teenagers, ninth through tenth graders interested in the environment. the program was structured to be an opportunity for youth from the southeast to serve the community in their own backyard. so they must live gore -- go to
school in district 10 and spent time at heron's head park and visit parks throughout the city to stretch their legs and for many of them it's an opportunity to be part of the city that they have not been to before. the greenagers have worked on california coastal clean up day which is the third saturday of every september and brings out hundreds of volunteers to the shoreline. they have been the east side coordinators for coastal cleanup day and the site captains at heron's head park. it involves a lot of logistics an good paperwork and good exercise for teenagers. so at this time, port and the san francisco recreation and parks department are negotiating terms of a m memorandum of
understanding having rec and park take over the eco center as the primary operators of the eco center. the terms would be based on the same fundamental concepts as the believe that has been operate bay.org and expired -- expires. they have been taking care of the heron's head park and the programmer take care of public programming and engagement and endeavoring to maximize the public benefit the eco center has to offer. so rec and park proposes to
expand on the program and leverage the partnerships in the community to enrich and work with the programs they're work with and staff the building to keep it open five days a week, free. all programs under the lease and future m.o.u., all are free of charge. and recs and park wants to keep it open five days a week including most weekend days. they'll be working with partner they already have with that
repropose to continue operations to operate eco center and have to return to the commission at your next meeting march 12th with a proposed final m.o.u. and request your authorization. that concludes the presentation. thank you. >> is there any public comment? >> we've seen in the eco center heron's head park part of our environmental program and support it. i'm just wondering, in terms of just the support maintenance of the building because it's going
to need some sort of maintenance, do we know what that costs? we have taken response interand -- responsibility and i don't know the exact figure but i think the building and park together are funded under an annual capital budget of about $100,000 a year. >> i'm just wondering and i understand. i'm just wondering if since this say great environmental project nor city of for instance and in partnership with rec and park if there's a way to get public/private foundational support for the operating or the actual building maintenance for grants or anything of some kind because i think it's a very worthy cause. i don't have an issue with it.
it seems we could find another way to sustain it since it's not a drain on our budget. >> it's a great question and i'm glad you asked. on the programming side, there are definitely grants available and i hope to work with rec and park to pursue some of those grant opportunities. there's funding available to view environmental education and support public engagement. those are competitive opportunities but i think we could make a good run at many of those. the former tenant, bay d.org go grants and local, regional and others grants to support their environmental education program. funding to maintain the build self -- itself is not so attractive to grant funders. they don't seem to want to pay for the plumbing to work. i'm working to reduce the operating costs associate with the eco center.
but i think we'll have to do that through operational efficiency rather than [indiscernible] >> i think corporations these days are sensitive to what you call e.s.r., environmental social responsibility and they would like to show their support for something in the community. i would continue to explore ways for them to express their support because this is a great project. >> agreed. thank you. >> thank you very much for the report like diane you have spearheaded this from the beginning and a want to thank you for your effort. it seems like with every operator it gets better and better. i'm looking forward to working more with park and rec and the fact it will be open more than it's ever been and accessible to
more of the various communities that use it. i look forward to that >> thank you. do we want our colleagues at rec and park comment? >> sure. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm from the recreation parks department the director of policy and public affairs with brenda cartgena who operates the program which we'll headquarter out of heron's head. looking forward to talking in more detail at the next meeting but want to thank you for the opportunity. we feel it's a great culmination of the work we started years ago. we have sported over 190,000 hours of volunteer service at
the park and looking forward to expanding that to additional programming, folding in our existing partner, recreation programming, library and any other community partner we can think of. it feels like a natural extension of our work and we're looking forward to working with you on it. >> thank you. >> i have one question. have you guys set a budget for this yet? for the port it will be on the same term as the expiring lease. we don't charge rent and the eco center operator provides the public benefits program free of charge to the public. >> as far as the programming budget. >> i'll let them answer that. >> because this say midyear transition, we're until july we'll be dealing with the existing resources essentially
including brenda and her staff. come the new budget year we have put in a request to fund two more full-time americorps intern to suppo-- interns to help in st and those are in our budget proposal that was just submitted. >> thank you. >> when you come back for the funding resolution can you give us what the budgets on the building side that we need to maintain over the next few years there'll be maintenance and it sounds like a self-sustaining building but there'll be some cost. find somebody who would like your name on the center and say they would like to support this and for a time. >> will come back to you on
march 12 with a budget breakdown. it may take a little longer to get that name on there. >> we can do that but don't give up. thank you. >> item 9a the informational presentation on the rfp strategy and criteria for the embarcadero historic district pier facilities. >> i'm rebecca the assistant deputy director at the waterfront development at the port with michael martin and diane oshima and i'm with planning, development and engineering and our real estate and development colleagues going forward and i'll acknowledge you next time because i'm sure you'll help me with the item. we have an informational presentation on a request for
proposal for historic peer -- pier solicitation. get settled in your seats. i'll give you found jagsal public processes and i'll go through the criteria staff has been looking at in order to develop the recommendations and get in the recommendations which is are initial rpp for piers 19, 19 1/2, 23 and 29 and a proposal to add 31 and continue recommended studies of piers 38, 40, 26 and 28 and with want to hear your thoughts on next steps on strategy in order to develop this further and come back to you with age -- an action item. there's a couple key background points as we consider the item.
the embarcadero historic district is one of the primary reasons we're here. it's important to remember that port cdc our stakeholder group came to the point of recognize and wanted to establish the contribution the piers make to the au then authenticity of the waterfront and they wanted to nominate the direct and we created the and we're here talking about solicitation. six of the facilities along the embarcadero have been
rehabilitated to allow greater occupancy over the last 20 years. that's how many we've been able to bring online to get more people into the sites. most the other facilities more than a dozen or so require significant capital and rehabilitation. in addition to the existence of the district the reason we're here to provide recommendations is because of the impending update to the waterfront plan. diane and her group led that process with our working group staffed by citizens who volunteered their time and came up with policy recommendations and among those endorsed by the port commission implicate and prioritize what to do with the district. the first is the rehabilitation of the piers is a major
priority. the other is we are charged with opening more piers for public use and enjoyment of the public assets. another part of the recommendation i want us to think about is the working group and policy gave the port more tools to bring those pirates per share priority to a reality and defining objectives. we were able to do this with our colleagues at state lands in a collegial way we developed the public trust objectives that apply to the embarcadero historic peers because they're viewed as such a special and unique part of the water front. those objectives are historic preservation, safety, public access, generate port revenue for improvements to other port facilities recognizing we can't do all of these at once so we want to generate revenue to
maintain other assets and including public oriented uses meaning any use s that bring people into the facilities to buy something, eat something, do something. the other tool is through the working group process and public came to an educational understanding that financial feasibility the projects must be financially feasible. that means all the items on the left and objectives and there's high-revenue generators were retail, restaurants, office and high-tech uses. we were able to discuss that with the public over the two-year process. the request for interest came out of the waterfront land use discussions. we were challenged by the public
to do more to get people inside the piers and find out what other operators may be out there that can bring something different to the water front. that was our challenge. i put out there and we spent time making sure it went out far and wide and were gratified to get different responses and i want to open this time of rest and the or i have an art and culture idea and want to work with you further on that. we found there wasn't an obvious entity like the exploratory one that came forward we learned a public oriented operator will be potentially smaller than a full pier and will require and will need a mixed use to become an
implementable project. the last thing i want to focus on is there's a distinct call to action to move it forward in a prudent and expeditious manner because time is running out. time is not on our side. there's current risks for flooding. the picture you're familiar with with the agricultural center and current risk of earthquake and further risk from deterioration as we allow them to not be significantly invested upon it will cost more through time. that's the call to action to act prudently and expeditiously. there's also a good opportunity to ride the wave together with other projects that have a lot of momentum. one is we have our is a seawall
and this is a way to leverage the resources for other part of the seawall program. in the waterfront plan we heard save the piers. we want to act on what was articulat articulated and do that quickly. we heard what people want. let's give them what they want. we got together in what would be success in undertaking what we all know will be a large endeavor. how do we define success? i want to take you through a
couple bullet points what we think say success. first is an open process. through the rfi process and during the waterfront land use plant process we feel we've been very cognizant of how people feel about this place and how they want to be involved. we want to continue having a very open process through an rfp process. this is a picture from one of the rfi events and from the online survey and members of the public regarding what area of the waterfront they'd like to see go forward with the r.f.p. we'd use tools to engage the public going forward. and the second is an implementab implementable project. the third is delivering as much as the trust benefits we set out earlier which is the frame for the district as much as we can.
the other is not everything in life is not better in all things in life but in this case more is better. to the extent we can deliver more resources and bring more back to life the better. how to we have to get down to the nitty-gritty in which piers we think can best meet the definition of success and what kind of r.f.p. meets the definition of success. i want to take you through the lenses we looked through. the first is location and how r.f.i.s respondents liked what piers for what use and how the public responded to what types of uses in what piers. we tried to look at the context of each pier, what's nearby, what may be a potential complimentary activity area.
or areas we already invested in integration of the seawall program. we think there's an opportunity to integrate but wanted to do red flag warning, are there any plac places that may be red flagged and there were not red flags other than with the ag building being quarfully studied because of the difficult structural area of the location. we did find the building while it may be a good r.f.p. contender should probably be delayed by some period of time perhaps a year while the seawall program continues study and then we can deliver more information for an r.f.p. that's one red flag that popped
up through this lens. the other lens we looked at is what is the existing facility condition and the capital wrong -- backlog and when we looked at the rankings of facilities by the various costs we believe it would take to bring them up to code and retrofit them we determined the preference for the r.f.p. should be with facilities for lower cost because we're wanting to make sure we have a skc successful outcome with as many public benefits as we can deliver in the project. we delved into feasibility for an implementable project. one was a 2017 study for the water use land update and they analysis looked at 19 and 38 as two exemplar piers which represent two substructure types. at that time the mix of use of
19 and revenue generating mixed use on 38 both achieved financial feasibility. we updated that analysis with the help of the model the consultant created with new information for 2019 including construction cost, escalation, increased rent for high-revenue generating uses like office and tax reform and historic tax credits are worth a little bit less and we included some level of costs for a seawall program and it indicated similar piers are still positive with a mix of uses include and pier 38 and similar pier shown to be negative with high revenue generating uses. i'll come back to that in the recommendation section. the final thing we looked at is what we're generating from the piers now. we want to recognize the
contribution to the operating budget and want to be clear as we go forward we don't want to be made worse off than we are today, if at all possible through the process. i was going say this is the reveal. our recommendation for the phase 1 piers include a single ritch for -- r.f.p. for the pier scored highest those were 19, 19 1/2, 23, 29 and we're suggesting 20 1/2 and 21 be shown as optional piers. the reason is the alcatraz embarkation site will be under construction for a few years. we want to make sure that project is complete before we introduce a new potential construction project right next door. that's the reason for holding
those as optional piers and this area of the water front has the highest number of resources. highest length of contiguous rfrt -- amount of resources. in thinking about what the piers can deliver, it would be incredible to imagine the transformation of this part of the waterfront. in thinking about the criteria of how to select potential partner, these are the five bullet points that are experience with engagement and a plan how to engage the community if selected. they need an early activation strategy and we think pier 29 has the opportunity to be an early activation site and permanent public oriented type
of pier use because of the unique construction circumstances attached to the parking lot next to the terminal. it would have to include use and we would want a team with experience working over water in a seismically active area and we'd want to have a financially feasible project. we also recommend piers 26, 28, 38 and 40 be studied a bit more. the planning level estimate is they weren't financially feasible but i want to stress that's a planning level estimate without trying to do a lot nor figure out if they can get over the hump of financial feasibility and with the level of analysis did, we're unwilling to say they're not feasible at this point.
we need to do more study the others were more clearly feasible and we felt more comfortable going forward with those piers. in thinking what we'll talk about and it's important to have the context of all the other processes going on. i've laid out the water front plan update and the pier solicitation program. i want to make note the first half of 2019 for the waterfront plan were anticipating releasing draft amendment and we so ceqa analysis with the anticipated release of ceqa and the pier solicitation project would lag that. we'd look at public vetting the first half of the year with r.f.p. recommendations the first half of the year and if directed, we'd issue the r.f.p. and then in 2020 we'd be
negotiating that project would do its own ceqa analysis. there'd be a time beyond 2020. it matches nicely with the program. they'll consider alternatives later in the year and at that point in time we could key in with a development partner to make sure the type of participation they would have in the seawall program would fit with the alternatives the seawall project team is coming in with. i'd love to hear your thoughts on the process and we'd worked hard to make sure it's integrating the land use program how to issue a solicitation if you direct us we'll take rpp criteria and resign them with our advisory group and our effective advisory grup and we'd do other outreach we the idea of
coming back with the rfp. i'll be available with questions with my other team members. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm alice rodgers and worked on the land use committee. i want to commend the report. i think it's very well done. the process was arduous but we appreciate the resources you've devoted to do it in an informed,
educated way. i have every page and conviction the water front land use recommendation will carry forward and will inform your selections but there's an awkward legislative grap where we go forward with the r.f.p. before we finalized and codified the plan. i haven't experienced any sense there isn't anything but 1,000% support for bringing all the land use recommendations over the finish line. it has come to my attention there's some that are concerned about the lapse of timing so
they plan to include the lots of the embarcadero. we were proposing it was better to funnel the piers to a single solicitation for all the piers wire proposing a master plan with strong community benefits allowing the public benefits to be recognized up front early in the piece. it's a great opportunity to create a world class waterfront district and you may consider a single solicitation. >> thank you.
is there any other public comment on this item? >> i'm debbie and this is my husband paul miller and we just wanted to quickly introduce ourselves. not sure if this is the right day to do that. this proposal would be our third location in san francisco. right now we have the lounge with jazz music and we have one with a were -- an organ and it would have three components involved. we have a craft cocktail bar and we'd partner with museums