Transcripts For SFGTV Port Commission 20240713

Mobilization of city resources, accelerated emergency planning, streamlined staffing and coordination across the city. It also allows the city to be reimbursed from the state and federal governments. And it raises awareness throughout San Francisco about how everyone can prepare in the event that covid19 appears in our community. Also santa clara and san diego counties have taken the same action, similar declarations to bolster their preparedness. Id like everyone to note that cruise ships visiting the port of San Francisco come from domestic location, as well as from canada and mexico. The u. S. Coast guard routinely reviews passenger records to document travel history of the vessel, passenger and crews, the coast guard has issued guidance on reporting it passenger symptoms, for passengers or crew. Additionally, the Cruise Line International association has implemented preventative measures for all cruise lines to limit potential exposure. The federal government has worked to contain the virus and the Health Department is monitoring hundreds of returning travelers. Its important to remember that the risk of the virus is based on travel history and contacts, not race, ethnicity, or culture. To stay up to date, please go to www. S fdph. Org. Ill remind everyone in our city government, we have weathered other types of crisis before and the most important thing is to listen and stay uptodate, not to panic or worry. But to instead stay informed and there will be more information as the situation evolves and our mayor is on top of coordinating the city and her departments and working with all that well be providing resources to us. So please stay up to date and informed and know that you will have good information as its available, so please keep an eye on www. Sfdph. Org. And that concludes my executive directors report. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on the executive directors report . Seeing none. Request item 10b, the ports fiscal year 2021 and 20212022. So moved. Second. Is there any Public Comment on the concept item . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. All in favor . Aye. Resolution 2009 and 2010 have been approved. Item aa request approval of the ports fiscal year 20202022 and 20212022 biennial Capital Budget. Torch a, commissioners. I am traity, the ports Deputy Director for finance and administration. Im here this afternoon to ask for the commissions approval of the ports Capital Budget for fiscal years 20202021 and 20212022. Commissioners you had a number of questions for me and my staff two weeks ago. In response, we have provided you with Additional Information to help with your consideration of this budget request. That information includes a list of all projects that were submitted for consideration in the fiveyear c. I. P. , a list of currently appropriated Capital Projects with balances, a more detailed description of the forced ranking process, that staff used to select projects for the c. I. P. And Additional Information about the waterfront beautification fund. So to address the two final items, just to give you a little more information on how we prioritize projects for inclusion in the fiveyear Capital Improvement program. The deputies met as a group to review the projects. And we used a forced ranking process. And so what this was was every single project that we considered, we needed to decide whether that project was number one. When we came to the second project, is that project number one or number two. The third project. Number one, number twoer or this three, so on and we made our way through 49 projects. At the end of the process we came up with a ranked list. We ranked our life safety projects first as a group on its own. And then we reviewed and ranked all of the other projects and considered items such as the projects useful life, whether or not it had to possible to generate revenue, what the return on investment would be, the importance to the ports public trust, whether or not a project could feasibly be delivered and the urgency of that project. Finally, just a little bit more information about the southern waterfront beautification fund. When staff reviewed the allocation to the beautification fund, we realized that the original appropriation request did not include a setaside for the revenue we expect to collect in the southern waterfront over the next two fiscal years. So, as a result, we revised both the Capital Budget request and the staff report to assume that there will be an additional allocation of 2. 5 million over the next two years, to conform with the ports southern waterfront beautification policy. So those are the highlights of the Additional Information in and the changes that we made and i am glad to answer questions from the commission. Thank you. Can i have a motion . So moved. Second. Commission Public Comment. Im sorry, is there any Public Comment on this item . We havent had any Public Comment. [laughter] is there any Public Comment on this item . Seeing none. I have no further questions, thank you. Commissioner . I have no further questions. Thank you for all of the material that we asked for. I have no questions. Again thank you. This is feasible. Sorry. Vice president . Katie, i have got about ten questions here. [laughter] i thought id shake you up a little bit. I know how shy and you are. Im good. I have no questions, thanks. Thank you. Katie, thank you so much. I want to thank you and your staff. Because this is a lot of information. I know it takes a lot to pull it all together. And i really appreciate you adding the additional charts and responses to the items. And i just have a couple of questions. Okay. And that is im so i guess what i was trying to understand is what was previously funded, if all of that has been completed or what is still incomplete or what still needs more funding . So weve got a lot of charts. But its hard to really figure it all out together. And so, i mean, we can do a oneoff and you can just, you know, walk me through that later. And then so on so what were funding this year is 84 million . 8877 . No. Go ahead. Yeah. So for both fiscal years, for fiscal year 20202020, were finding 55 million. In fiscal year 0212022, yes that is so then the table three, with the proposed 20202021 budget, 54,000,689 and 29,000,589. Im just finding this in the staff report. This is table three. It doesnt have a page number. But its before page 16. And after page 13. So it must be 14. So the 84,270,000. No. Yeah. The 84278 is sorry, commissioner. So its off by 3. 1. Pardon me for a moment. Commissioner, the total amount that we are proposing to fund in the next two fiscal years, for all appropriated projects, is 84. 278 million. That includes an additional 2. 5 million for southern waterfront beautification. Okay. So the chart on page 14 is the correct one . Yes. Okay. And then okay. So the attachment 1, where it has prior appropriations. What period is that over . I cannot answer that question. So its over multiple fiscal years. Okay. So projects can be appropriated Capital Projects are appropriated and they carry over from yeartoyear, the money rolls forward. And because of the transition of the Financial System in 2017, it has become somewhat challenging for us to look back prior to fiscal year 17. Okay. So so from this chart, these are projects submitted for capital funding. And this could be for like the last ten years . Well, i guess from me it will be easier if the prior appropriation were for a period certain, whether its the Previous Year or the last two years. Right. So we can really understand. I think what i was really trying to figure out is how do we do last year . As far as what was appropriated, what was completed, what still needs to be complete or, you know, that was really what i was trying to figure out. So this sheet leaves more questions than answers. [laughter] sorry to hear that. So at the beginning of the staff report, we do note the projects that we completed in fiscal year 20182019. I saw that. I saw completed projects. Okay. And then but it was the appropriations. So i wasnt sure if these were all the projects from last year, with or if they were the projects projects from last year that had remaining balances . So on page 4 of the staff report, we list six projects that we completeed in fiscal year 1819. Okay. So what list are they on . Theyre just in the text. Theyre not in a table. Got it. Got it. So theres no dollar amount. Theres no cost associated. But these were those are the projects that we completed. Thank you. The projects that we note on page 8, in table 1, are projects that have been completed over some past potrero. Past period of time, not necessarily in the past year. We as finance staff need to get a little bit better working with our colleagues in the Engineering Division to go through and close out projects, when the projects are completed. Unfortunately what happens now is when a project is complete and the funds arent necessarily pulled out of the project and closed to fund balance. We need to just go through on a regular basis, probably on an annual basis to do that work to close outed funding. So the projects that are listed in table 1 on page 8 have likely been complete for some period of time. Okay. Okay. So i think its for us who are not part of the finance staff, do not deal with this on a daily basis, when we see it two, three times a year. I think its easier for us to be able to understand it if we can see a history, as well as a projection. But really understanding how were doing with our projects. So the projects that were approving this year, so next year when and where will we see how those projects will progress. Right. Thats whats missing for me. Thats what i was trying to get a picture of. Okay. You know, how are we doing . And are some of these projects that were trying to fund, were they previously funded or is this new funding . You know, just trying to understand the progression. So im okay. And then amador street sewer and pavement repair. It was appropriated some time ago. Yes. Is that a project influx or in progress . Yes, it is. And i at some point may defer to my engineering colleagues on this. Am score street is has received multiple multiple over the last five years. In the most recent capital appropriation processes, we were reviewing am score. It became clear that we are still doing Due Diligence to understand what the total scope of that project needs to be. Weve been working with d. P. W. Its a sewer improvement project. And it as we were as staff doing having a call for projects and then doing analysis on those projects, it became clear that am score street likely will need more money. But we dont know yet how much more. And so we chose for now not to include additional funding in the budget. Okay. But that 7 million is still set aside . Yes, it is. We dont know how long its been there . We dont know we dont know when were going to use it . We can analyze how long its been there. So we can analyze how long and what years that there was appropriations to am score street. The issue has always been the design on am score street. We need to do the sewer differently and the Stormwater Management differently. But getting an actual project design so this is a project thats been stuck in design for some time, getting a good design that the department of public works signs off and would accept am score one day as a city street, is where weve gotten caught off guard. So the design has continued to go on and with different types of solutions. But the money sitting there is similar to it sitting in fund balance, in that whether it sits in a project or sits in unappropriated fund balance, has the same result, more or less. But i think what might be useful is to have a capital conversation and informational item, where we give you what youre asking for, which is to look at what was appropriated, what projects we funded last year and how theyre going. And what projects are still open and into the closed. Some of them are new projects, from a year or so ago. And some of them will be much, much older, like pier 35 substructure, where weve been thinking about that for years and waiting on an army corp match. I think we should schedule an informational item to dig into capital. Its a good time to do so. Two budget cycles ago you funded a project Management Office and so weve been taking a lot of efforts internally to deliver capital more efficiently, with the small staff we have. So its a good time to update you on what on the questions youre asking. Right. That would be wonderful. And then my last question is South Beach Harbor. Yes, maam. And the 7 million. And just wondering if whatever were going to spend this money on, would any of this be taken care of in the r. F. P. Thats been put out, or with the resiliency . No. So South Beach Harbor has been set up as its own little enterprise within our within the port enterprise. So these projects are specific to the harbor and their needs for the marina and youre just about to get an informational report from the director of that marina. For pier 38 and 40r. F. P. , thats a separate process to try to bring in private investment and repositioning of those piers. And resiliency is tackling other issues related to the seawall and flood on the line of the embarcadero. So these projects are related to providing an aplus Customer Service to all of the recreational boaters, doing maintenance and repair, dredging on the harbor, operationsself. And weve structured it so the money the harbor earns is the one the harbor spends. And theyve i keep calling them they. Theyre part of our family. Weve applied the capital setaside policies and discipline to make sure the harbor generates enough revenue to take care of itself. Right. Okay. I think thats all my questions. Does anybody else have any questions . Okay. Thank you, katie. I really appreciate this. All in favor . Aye. Resolution 2011 has been approved. Thank you so much, commissioners. 12a, informational presentation on the financial and Operational Performance of South Beach Harbor. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is joseph monroe. Im the harbor master of South Beach Harbor. Joe, can the pull the mic right up to your mouth. Im here to give you the presentation on the Financial Performance of South Beach Harbor. All right. South beach harbor is a full Service Marina consisting of 700 disciplines. Third largest in the bay. We have a guest dock, the south guest dock. We provide commercial access and also recreational access as well. Slips consist of up to 30 excuse me. Im sorry. 30 feet up to 100 feet. Back in 1986, the harbor was constructed and managed by the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency. And in 2012, the port of San Francisco assumed operational responsibility. In 2015, the Commission Approved transfer of assets and operation to the port. In april 2019, the transfer was finalized, when the cal voting documents were approved. Some of the partnerships we have down in South Beach Harbor, south beach yacht club, thats a 500member, allvolunteer club. Theyre known for their great races that they put on each year and theyre known to draw up to 40 vessels during the summer. And they also provide a nice Junior Sailing Program for the youth. And that really helps get our youth out on the water and hopefully provide us with new recreational boaters in the future. We also do work with the San Francisco bay keepers. They specialize in outreach and education on keeping the bay clean, which is very important. And they also put on an annual parade and a run in which they use harbor facilities. Some of our operators that come down to the harbor, commodore, bay cruises and events and also horn blower cruises. We get into South Beach Harbor pier 40 shed, we have a number of onshore tenants. Some of those are spinnaker sailing and city kayak, boat washington, to name a few. Actually have a knew photos i wanted to go over with that. Okay. Here we go. When the port took over management of the South Beach Harbor marina and pier 40 shed, the decision was made to have the department take over the tenant leases and management of the property. Some of those improvements have been made over the last few years. And twe updated and resigned leases with all of the onshore tenants. We added a new alarm system with cameras inside and out of the shed. We also divided the bay im sorry, the shed into bays to provide new space for new businesses along with adding new storage lockers for rent. Here is a perfect example of some of our Public Access we have down at the harbor. Right here what you see is the south promenade on the shed. There it overlooks the harbor, gives you a nice view and you can see oracle park. In the view. Also if you are looking to the left toward the end, youll see the bay bridge. It definitely provides a nice area for the public to come down and enjoy themselves, also providing benches and things that of that nature. If they want to walk out with their families, they can do that. We look forward to continuing rcbc improvements. Some of those include resurfacing and adding guardrails, so they can the public can further go around the back end of the pier 40 shed and enjoy that wonderful view. Earlier we were talking about some of those projects that were working on we have in the cue. One of those is a north guest dock. As you can see here, we need to go ahead and replace this dock. If you were down at the harbor any time over the last year or so, youll see that the docks are actually not there. This is an old picture. But we hope to add 350foot dock, while also providing a better commercial landing space for some of those cruiseins, like the commodore and things like that. And also we plan on adding a kayak dock for public use. This project is estimated at around 3. 5 million. Heres another one of those important projects right here. Theres the baffle wall. The port maintenance team, the divers will be taking care of this for us. We were looking at the slide, youll see that we have a lot of those panels that are offlevel. So we need to raise and realign those panels and fill in the gaps to make sure that we get no more seepage of silt and buildup coming from the north side into the south side. You know, so once we do that, that will decrease the need to dredge, which is something were also looking at. This project is estimated at around 300,000. Right here one of the most important parts of this presentation is the financial slide that shows the progression from 2012 and 2013, moving all the way up to where we sit currently. Since the port of San Francisco assumed management of South Beach Harbor, several steps have been taken to streamline and stabilize the harbor financial situation. In 2013, we increased the berthing fees by 22 , and we spread that over three years. We also had exodus come in and manage our insurance program. We increased the fees and on waitlists and our landing fees. Most importantly we were able to pay off the balance of a bond debt. Since the port took over management of South Beach Harbor, weve gone from a net negative of a Million Dollars to a net positive 1. 4 million, while also paying off that bond debt, which as you can see earlier in the presentation, its very important that we put those funds back into the harbor. And provide a nice harbor, for not only the tenants, but the public that comes down to the harbor. So our goal is simple. We want to continue to enhance the harbor while maintaining our status as the top marinas in the bay and make sure that the harbor is providing for our tenants and the public for years to come. This completes my presentation. And i am open for questions. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, commissioner gilman . Thank you for the presentation. And your great work to move it the operations forward, so we have positive cash flow going through. I have one question which i hope a couple of months ago, maybe six or nine months ago, there was some emails to the commissioners around issues around the restroom situation and the Public Restrooms at pier 40. I was wondering if that had been resolved . Yes, maam. We are speaking on the restrooms inside the pier 40 shed or carmans . I thought it was within pier 40 shed . Inside the shed we have the v. I. P. Heads. And so those are you know, we have a code. If were not using the code, were using a key. Those are adequate for the tenants and theyre feeling good about it . Yes, maam. Thank you so much for the preparation. Congratulations again on moving forward. To a positive cash flow. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner woo ho . Thank you very much. I think i have seen this really great journey since we first took it over and all of the issues and it seems like its on a steady path. Thats great progress. Thank you very much. So i just want to correlate. Because we just went through the capital plan and there was money that was previously spent on South Beach Harbor. Youre talking about this 3. 5 million. And then looking back at the capital plan, you know, we have 3. 1 million. And part of it also, as i remember when we inherited this bcdc at the times i recall the estimated Capital Improvements, they insisted that we undertake was Something Like 10 million. So im just trying to understand how much of the bcdc requirement have we met and how much of the proposed new improvements, that you mentioned in your deck, are part of the bcdc or are they in addition to the bcdc, to improve the South Beach Harbor . Were going to get you help, joe. [laughter] so im going to start it and diane ocean is going to help us with more. So we had the Redevelopment Agency had some unmet bcdc requirements on the break water. And weve been working with joe and with bcdc to change that permit requirements, to yield us better access to the facility. And diane ocean can come up and give an update on how the process is going. Long and short, we havent provided Public Access on that break water. But were working with bcdc to change that requirement. Come on up. Thats not part of all of this funding that were talking about . It is not. Hopefully that 10 million overhang is not the same as we thought it was . Ill have diane give you an update. Good afternoon. My memory is correct, 1 million . Absolutely correct. We are in the midst of a permit amendment request. And it would reduce the what were basically proposing is that we put in more water recreationrelated Public Access benefits, instead of the high cost pier apron Public Access, that was required under the Redevelopment Agencys permit. And so we are in the process of getting cost estimates for what would cost, which would be at a much lower cost point than what the original obligation was. And assuming that we can make sure that we have a financing strategy to cover those replacement obligations, our intention is to go forward and to square up our bcdc at this point sort of receptive to our proposals . Yes, they are. Okay. That would be wonderful. Thank you. And then i guess you can now answer the numbers that seem like different numbers i see here. You have 3. 5 million. Theres 3. 1 million. What we spent already and what we have in the capital plan. So are the numbers all squared away the same, similar . So, commissioner, so the numbers that were included in the Capital Budget, that you just approved, are we are planning to appropriate over the next two fiscal years 3. 1 million. Thats for capital work at sought beach harbor. Okay. So okay then Going Forward when we look at this income statement i guess, or financials, right now the Capital Improvements are not listed under the expenditures, right . These are just operating expenditures. Yes, thats correct. With the assumption that the net falls to fund balance and then is appropriated for capital work as necessary. Before we get so excited that we have all of this extra cash, its really totally used up . Yes. [laughter] yes. The deferred maintenance need at the harbor will more than absorb the 1. 4 million in net revenue. And in principle, i dont know that weve made a firm policy decision, but we are basically saying whatever we generate in net is being reinvested in South Beach Harbor and not diverted to any other Capital Projects . Thats a policy that we have adopted, correct . Thats how the port is managing the facility. I dont know if you have affirmatively adopted that policy, as a Commission Policy level. But that is how were managing the harbor. And i do believe that when we discussed taking the facility from the Redevelopment Agency, we discussed the importance of paying down the debt and investing on that revenue and capital to make sure that the facility continued to just be such a good value to the customers. But when we got the facility, it was getting into the life cycle where investment was going to become more critical. So we were very eager to pay down the bonds, so we would have adequate capital to keep the facility up. I dont think youve adopted a formal policy, the net revenue from the harbor supports the capital work at the harbor. Thats how were managing the operation. Weve always asked periodically to get a sort of update, standalone on how South Beach Harbor operates in terms of and i think its really great to see that we have paid off that loan, because that was sort of a sort of a middle stone around our neck when we inherited. Its great to see the negative numbers. We knew that when we inherited it, we were inheriting something negative and to turn it into a positive. My last question is technical. If we have boats that want to come in that are over 100 feet, where do they dock . Where do they go . So like if you have a super yacht come in. Thats for joe and andre or dominick if hes here. Yes. So we do have the south guest dock, which can accommodate on a transient or just a special excursion landing. It can accommodate those south a accommodate the vessels. For super yachts they have docked at other piers along the waterfront. So pier what comes to mind, pier 15, pier 35 north. If there arent berthing conflicts at some of the cruise terminal facilities we can accommodate larger yachts there. Then in the southern waterfront as well, at pier 50 and at the shipyard. Okay. I dont know whether theres an opportunity for us to continue to attract them . And i know in certain ports that are popular in the mediterranean, they make a lot of money off the docking fees. Yes. I dont know if thats an opportunity for us to continue to think about that . Weve had prelim discussions on it in the southern waterfront. The last question in the staff report, you mentioned 90 occupancy on the slips. And theres a waitlist. So whats the 10 . Is it because youre waiting for people to how does that 10 factor in, the fact that you have a long waiting list . Correct. We have about 25 transient slips. So we keep those open. And then not to mention were still we have people that the slip fees rise, we do have some folks that are exiting the harbor. So we account for that by people that are exiting the harbor and people coming off the waitlist. So the 90 is really we are at maximum occupancy . Yes, maam. The others are transient slips. Were repricing every year now . We have. Yes. Weve set our c. P. I. And reprice every year. And joe with his team has instituted a fee to be on the waitlist to clean up that waitlist. When we started managing the harbor, there was no cost to be on the waitlist. And kind of no one ever left and the waitlist was very, very long. So with some of the changes in operation, i think the waitlist is smaller and reflects actual interest. And we have slightly more turnover since weve increased the rates to market. Correct. Thank you. Commissioner makras . Thank you for the presentation. No questions. Vice president adams . Joseph monroe, this is the first time ive ever seen you here. Is this your first presentation . Yes, sir. You did a great job. Thank you. I noticed my years being a commissioner, and herb on the and everybody on the staff, eyes just move or look at mike martin. Just very they look that way. And definitely rescue them. I really appreciate the history. I didnt know at one time that redevelopment had owned it. And just the history is quite interesting. In your job as the harbor master, where do you see the port going, especially with the South Beach Harbor, like commissioner woo ho said like trying to get bigger ships in . Is that something you think we can do and make more money . Yes, sir. I definitely think that. When we do replace that north guest dock, a portion of that dock can be used for those larger vessels. And as far as where i see the harbor and where were trying to push it, we definitely need to push it on the more technical side. You know, stepping into the future, just with how we provide service to the customers. So if we can do that, especially with the younger crowd coming up, we want to make it easier for them. We just want them to be able to come out and just enjoy their vessel, you know. And make things easier for them, where theres technically when theyre dealing with the office, administratively, things of that nature. You mentioned the yacht clubs, the gatekeepers, excursion operators. Does this allow like kids from the community or school kids to come down and have access to the port and see these things . Yes. Definitely. So i highlighted the south beach yacht club. You know, every year in the summer, the entire summer they have that Youth Sailing program. And they get kids out and usually what i do is ill go over and ill speak with them and kind of explain what i do. You know, because not only do we want folks on the water, but we still need folks on the technical side as well, because i know that i have friends and family that some folks that they dont know the operation of a harbor or what a harbor master is. So i try to educate them on that. Okay. Well, thank you. Congratulations. Thank you. On your new job. Joe, thank you so much for this report. This is extremely encouraging. And good to know that the harbor is becoming selfsufficient, not totally. But becoming. So i want to thank you for all that youve done to make that happen. Just have one question. That is regarding the boating loan. How much longer do we have that . Or do we have to pay that . Many years. [laughter] i think we have at least 20 years left on that loan. Oh, really. Yeah. Redevelopment took a 45year term with cal boating. Wow nice. Okay. Andre is whispering behind me, 2036. 15 more years. Okay. Thats not as bad. Thank you. I just want to say i think joseph is doing a phenomenal job at South Beach Harbor. And not only is he the harbor master, he sets up tables and chairs and does whatever needs to be done to make everyone happy. I appreciate your preparation. Thank you. Thank you. Clerk item 13 a, request authorization for staff to enter into a 99year ground lease for parcel e2 at the praised value of 5 million. Good afternoon, commissioners. Rebecca beicini. I direct projects at the port. Happy to be providing the followup to the february 11th presentation we had two weeks ago. I want to acknowledge some folks in the audience who may help me answer questions. Youll see me eyeball them for support. Christine from the port, mike and annette. Also want to acknowledge kelly presser who is here in the audience from brookfield and tim rundy who was the peer review appraiser on this project. Im happy that tim was able to join us today. Im going to go through slides that are going to be a little bit familiar to you from two weeks ago. I want to point out, as im going through, that the decision or the request were making of you today really focus on that action item. Youll see that its the were trying to provide ourselves and the developer the opportunity to transact on a parcel. Were trying to spewed transaction on another parcel. And we really feel this is the best path we have and a limited set of options that are set out in the pier 70 framework transaction document. Ill try to keep coming back to the action item thats before you today, as theres a lot of detail that i know can get can blur the vision in terms of what youre looking at today. Heres an overview of the pier 70 site. Pier 70 is a threephase project, well under way. Construction started in 2018. The horizontal construction started in 2018. We have highlighted for you the seven phaseone parcels, blue means office, yellow means condo or apartment residential, red means flex cultural, the big red box is the only building thats under construction. The two parcels we want to speak about today are highlighted in the dark blue, a at the top of the screen, e2 at the bottom of the screen. Both of the sites haveup gone quite a lot of design work. E2 is a multifamily residential apartment site. Its about 281 units. 20 of those are about 56 units are affordable to households making 80 of the area Median Income or below. Parcel a is a commercial office building. You might have seen sop arms about it. It has a unique mass timber construction type, thats sort of renewable and more sustainable construction type. Its about 350,000 square feet. The d. D. A. That governs the entire pier 70 transaction, that we have with brookfield, sets forth the process by which brookfield has the opportunity to exercise options. Thank you very much the option they have the option of the 19 parcels of the site. They can lease or buy, whether a condo or leased site. Including parcel aand e2. The the jointly selected appraisaller from a list approve where had the d. D. A. We came up with the department of real estate and with brookfield. We jointly select an appraiser. The d. D. A. Then goes allows the appraiser to go through the process of drafting. We provide comments back to them, all transparent to one another. We can only communicate, so longs were on the same email chain or phone call. At the end of the process, the d. D. A. Allows the appraiser to set the value. If the value is above the down market thresholds, thats the value generally that we thought each parcel would be worth, if its above the threshold, brookfield can exercise the option or decline their option. We can take it to market. If its below that value, then that triggers sort of a Decision Point for both parties in their sole discretion. Thats why were before the port commission, because in our sole discretion, we can take this action. We only come to you with the hard questions. So were here now. We have appraisals for both sites. You can see each site appraised value and its down market threshold. E2 is shown here. Its down market threshold was 11. 3 million, parcel a, down market threshold was 12 8 million, aphrased value 66 million. On an individual basis, we now have a potential down market on one and a very well above market on the other. The total on the write is just for comparison purposes, at approvals we thought the two parcels might be worth 24 million. Turns out one appraiser thinks theyre worth 71 million. I talked a little bit about what the process is in the d. D. A. But i want to take a moment to talk about what the appraise did. In particular for e2 and for a as well. The instructions state that the appraiser must continue a lease two approaches to value. One of the approaches to value is called the residual value analysis. And then they can select another. They can select a cost approach or a sales comp approach or another approach that they deem appropriate. They can do more than two as well. The independent appraiser initially came with a 1 Million Value for e2. We had many, many comments to get it up to are 5 million. Ultimately its important to note that they in this analysis, the residual value, which considers the cost and the value of construction, they came up with a negative 13. 4 Million Value, with that approach. They then also looked at the sales comp approach. They ultimately selected three land sales between 2018 and that occurred between 2018 and 2019, that were most comparable to the site. Using that analysis, they came up with the value of 10 million. So this is a really important bracket exercise that they did. They thought the site is worth somewhere between negative 13. 4 million or 10 million. And they create that bracket and they ultimately decided that taking into factors that are particular to the site, that the value should be about 5 million. I want to point out that the residual value analysis, theyre looking at Construction Costs, theyre looking at rental rates, they consider all of the important factors and the reason they didnt respond to our comments, as much as we wanted them to and going from the 1 million initial value to the 5 million, they noted was to a couple of things. Construction costs they think are going to keep going up. Rental rates they dont think are going to go up. The 20 onsite inclusionary units is somewhat higher than some of the comps that they were looking at. Also the pier 70 tax its not its not a huge tax, but its relatively unique in San Francisco. And the other item with the special tax, that just creates a little bit of risk for the developer, they have to pay on a date certain, regardless whether the building is built and occupied. Those are the factors they cited in noting how they were looking at the valuation of both of the approaches. What do we do now . Do we considered our paths really, really carefully. The one we are ultimately recommending to you is to transact the parcels together. The reason we came to this is a couple of things. First, i think that we felt that it was really important. These are the first two parcels is pier 70. Its really important to us to get money into this deal. And to start to create that community, that the horizontal construction is creating. I think its a really important policy outcome for us. The other key thing is that by tieing the two parcels together and moving up that highvalued Office Parcel, they could have transacted it up to 18 is months, we moved that all the way up to no more than 180 days. In this case, time is really money for the port. Were accruing about a 1. 4 million return on the amount of money that brookfield has spent on the horizontal, the faster we can get money into the deal, the better. It allows us to start bonding. We need to sign to get the c. F. D. Bonds. We also available the down market delay on the two parcels. If were able to tie them together and sign this letter, that would require them check the option within 120 days, then they would not be able to call down market delay in the document. If they call down market delay on the two parcelser the timing of a and e2 is suspended until we have an appraisal above the down market threshold for e2. The one drawback of this is that the e2 land value is lower than the port expected at approvals. We tried to make this pill a little easier to swallow by moving up the a parcel and ensuring theyll transact on that in the 120 and 180 they have to exercise the option at 120 days, close on the parcel in an additional 60 days, up to 180 days total. We considered very seriously the alternative path. And this is a little bit of a, you know, game theory process. We also have the alternative set forth here, which is we can dispute the e2 appraisal. Brookfield could do the same. That then sets up a sort of process of arbitrated appraisals, where two additional appraisals are brought ontoward. If theyre not closed with one another, we have a appraiser who breaks the tie and can determine the actual value. That could result in one good outcome. And that is that we get a higher value on e2. That would be what we are seeking in doing that dispute. There are job acts. We dont know whether or not the new appraisal how much higher it might come in, or if it comes in higher at all. We think, based on our conversations with our appraisal consultant, who is here today, that it is unlikely to get up to the 12 Million Value. Even if it did, we would lose out on the value weve created by putting the two parcels together, because a would be closing on its normal timeline of potentially up to 18 months. So we would lose out on that value. We might gain something in an e2 value. We might lose something by losing the time benefit that we have in the deal, before today, which is moving a. Up. According, its just a general delay in the project. It would delay the Housing Units coming online and, of course, we talked about any delays are time is money for the port. So we looked at this really seriously. And im as much of a betting i like to roll the dice like anybody else, the two paths, one created too much uncertainty. The other one created more of a certain path. Where at least we have the opportunity for both of these parcels to head to the finish line together. So this just sums up, the slide sums up a little bit of what i said. The rationale for taking this path, we follow the process in the d. D. A. We worked very hard to try to get the values up. The appraiser, who looked at both parcels, use as very similar approach on both parcels. And then the outcomes rationale is that the deal weve tried to put together, for your consideration, its gaining us a lot of outcomes we want. Two parcels going at once, instead of one and then another one being very uncertain. Spieds up the office closing, which is a value to the port of about 6. 5 million, relative to how long they can take to close. Thats a clear financial benefit for the port. We also ensure that the apartment parcel isnt left behind, if things went through the dispute process and they didnt reach a down market delay threshold of the 12 million for e2, then the Office Parcel could potentially go and e2 would lag until the appraisal came up. So overall we thought the alternative path could potentially cost us money and it had some uncertain benefits that really rely on how the appraisal process comes out. Heres the request for you today. Its to approve the resolution. The resolution would allow the port to offer brookfield the option to transact on e2, below the down market threshold and provide us the opportunity to deliver the balanced office and residential start to phase 2, phase 1 vertical development. Should brookfield choose to exercise the option. If we get that approval today, this is the process that would go forward. Wed offer the option in exchange for speeding up parcel a. Wed linked two options together. If they elect to exercise the option, 120 days from now, wed enter those contracts within 60 days wed have to close on those leases. If that 120day mark comes along and they dont exercise both options, then both parties revert to the existing rights that they have in the documents today. So we would be in likely a dispute scenario. Wed still get to roll the dice then i guess. So thats the presentation i have for you today. Happy to answer questions. Thank you. Can i have a motion . So moved. Second. Is there any Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioner makras. I have a couple of handouts here. If you could pass them down. A couple of handouts for everybody. Thank you, president brandon. I am happy to share my views of the agreement, both in terms of strength and weaknesses. At the time that we are asked to inject our oversight to the Development Agreement. This is the first opportunity to do so. We are acting in the interest of the public now and in a future, none of us will live to see. We cannot focus on the immediate term or failure to give weight to the longterm represented in our decision today. Pier 70 and the Development Agreement, the San Francisco port entered into with brookfield properties, a project that i support. I will honor and oversee implementation of the Development Agreement from time to time, as required by the agreement. I will not support a 99year lease at 9 million reasonable value. I will support a 99year lease at 28. 2 million, fee simple value. I believe 28. 2 million is the fairmarket value for parcel e2 at pier 70. What is being asked of us today is to approve a perunit value at 32,000, when comparables are valued at 100,000 per unit. What we are being asked to do today so approve a land transaction at 5 million, where the true value is approximately 28. 2 million. I believe a weakness in the agreement was a decision to accept a fully prepaid grounds lease for parcel e2. I believe a better disposition of the parcel would have been a Standard Lease with annual rent payments. A rent schedule on a fixed term for 30 years to allow the developer to fully pay off a standard 30year loan, then implement a market rental value with escalating rents, in accordance with land value, adjusted from time to time, like every five years or ten years. This would yield the port a more index value, it would create a cash flow for the San Francisco port and would yield substantially more money over a 99year lease. If we were to set a land value at 28. 2 million and take a simple 3 annualreturn, we will yield 846,000 annually. Over a tenyear period, our income would be 8. 4 million. In 99 years, without any rent increase, our Lifetime Income would exceed 83 million. With some rent increases, it can well exceed 100 million. I do not support taking 5 million, as is suggested by the appraiser, in exchange for foregoing 8. 4 million over the next ten years, or 100 million over the lifetime of this lease. Let me share my view in another way. If we were to get 846,000 in annual rent, we can debt surface over 20 million of our Capital Project each 30 years. So this cash flow can effectively pay for over 60 million in Capital Projects over the life term of this lease. This is a much better use of parcel e2, at pier 70, than a onetime payment of 5 million. I will share a few facts that support the value of parcel e2 at pier 70 at 28. 2 million. I submit for your review 22 sales of entitled projects that have sold in San Francisco. These are sales in 2017, 2018, and 2019. I put all of my weight on the five sales that took place in 2019 for the sole purpose of this evaluation. The prior years are secondary consideration. The five sales are large parcels ranging in unit count from 118 to 418 units. Parcel e2 at pier 70 is a 282unit entitled project. Sales of these parcels range from 10 million to 78 million. The perunit price range is 54,000 to 233,000 per unit, rounded off to the nearest thousand dollars. I believe the best comparable for parcel e2 of these five is pier 70, partial k north, which the port of San Francisco told sold for 24 million or 95 million per unit. And 14 otis sold for 40 million or 95,000 per entitled unit. For a point of reference only, i submit for your review 13 sales of entitled projects sold in oakland. Thats page 2 of what i handed out. These are sales for 2017, 2018, and 2019. I put my weight on seven sales that took place in 2018 and 2019. The seven parcels are sales of large parcels, ranging in unit count from 130 units to 450 units. The sale of these parcels range from 7 million to 42 million. The perunit range is 49,000 a unit to 93,000 a unit, again rounded off to the nearest thousand dollars. The comparables on face value demonstrate the appraisal before us is inferior. Who would ever believe an appraisal for a San Franciscoapproved project was appraised for less than a similar sized project in oakland. In support of my belief for a 28. 2 Million Value, i refer you to the appraisal. That is the second handout that i provided. On page 144 of the appraisal, the appraiser uses a land value at exactly 28. 2 Million Value or 100,000 a unit. Their own statement of value in this section of the appraisal supports my conclusion of value for parcel e2 at pier 70 at 28. 2 million. I do not believe we are or the public would be best served by accepting an appraisal that is not based on market or comparable values. I would encourage the commission to reject this appraisal. Thank you, madam president. Okay. Rebecca, would you like to respond . I think thank you for the comments. Ive distributed some of the material to some of the folks that are here today to help me out, if they have comments in digesting the information. The one comment i think its important to make, it was an interesting, have deinteresting calculation of what we might do with the money. The commission might recall that the structure of the deal requires that all of the leases are prepaid. While brookfield has outstanding developer capital. Practicalfield has about 100 million of investment theyve put into the site in dodge construction, that site in horizontal construction. So every lease until that is paid off, has to be prepaid, 99year prepaid lease. All of the money from the prepaid ground lease goes into repay the horizontal Construction Cost. So that isnt an option unfortunately under the transaction terms, they invested the money in the horizontal order in order to be repaid through the vertical and through subsequent bonds. I think on the valuation, if i could pause for a minute, and we hear other comments, while i confer with some others to look at the comps and see whether or not theres any response that we can provide. Thank you. Commissioner woo ho. Its not an easy transaction. I think that commissioner makras has pointed out something in isolation, in terms of his Technical Analysis and we appreciate that he went to the great extent of his research. I guess when i have reviewed this project and looked at it in terms of holistically, in terms of what were gaining in terms of tieing the two parcels together, and as i recall from last time when we talked about it, the difference in value at that time was made up in terms of the timing of the closing of the escrow that the port would make up in terms of from a cash basis. So from a value basis, im not in a position to debate with the experts. Because im not an appraiser myself. And i think that we have obviously have both the port, brookfield and a third party and we would ask the consultants maybe to comment, to help us respond to some of the comments. So i think that, you know, weve worked on this project and i think the concern that i would have is that if we were to not accept this amount in terms of the value, what it does to the transaction and obviously brookfield is here and they could tell us what they would do. And endanger the continued Development Timeline of this project, which has been something weve worked on for i dont know how many years now. Long time. For a long time. Its a very important project. Its one of the key projects of the port. Along with mission rock in terms of the whole development. So there are some consequences that i think we have to think about holistically. What i think that while im not going to debate whether 5 million is right or wrong, i think what i did see in the presentation and in the staff report is the fact that the other parcel is coming in higher than what we had anticipated. And helps to offset. So i think that the offset and i think, unless we can see say that the offset is insufficient, that i think that we are economically not worse off in this transaction. Though there may be some, you know, we cannot go back and change the terms of the prepaid leases rebecca has just mentioned. I think we have to look at the transaction holistically. Are we going to move this Development Forward and tieing the two transactions together help us to get back on track. Or are we going to now jeopardize what the future is. I guess i would ask that question. Are we jeopardizing the future of the development if we do reject this appraisal . I can make some comments. So what were asking you to do is to allow us to transact the housing or apartment parcel below the strike price. And that strike price was developed really to protect ourselves, because we did not want the developer to move forward with projects, if the market was so bad or downmarket delay, that market wasnt right for development. And that strike price is important to protect the port and make sure we want the developer to transact and the economics are working. So were not asking for you to approve the appraisal. The appraisal process is set forth in the agreement, the lbda. And we have a thirdparty appraiser, a certified thirdparty appraiser, who has done two types of analysis, residual land value and comps to conclude that the value is 5 million. What were asking is to be able to transact below that strike price of 11 million. 11. 2 million. And were asking you to do that, because we want to deliver brookfield to deliver housing and office in the first phase. The same appraiser using the two forms of analysis confirmed that the office was 66 million and the strike price is four times less than that, what is the strike price on office, retaining wall . Rebecca . I know its five times the strike price. Five times the strike price. Its 12. 7 million. And so when we were able to negotiate also a reduction in the closing costs, when we look at it on balance with Office Coming in so high. We find our way to say we would we prefer and recommend strongly a phase that delivers both parcels and that the economics for the port is preserved or preferred here, because it is in the ports interest that we move the project forward and transact. Because we are holding and paying an 18 return for the Developers Cost for infrastructure and soft costs. So that is why were asking that you give us authority to transact with brookfield, below the strike price on e2. And as rebecca has described, in addition to preserving the ports economic interests in the project, it preserves a really important policy goal, which is to deliver this apartment, affordable housing, 20 affordability. So we want to get the housing in the ground. Do you want the consultants to come in at all . I think mr. Rundy would like to make a comment, based on his threeminute look. [laughter] thats what you get when you get pull into a Commission Meeting. Good afternoon. My name is tim rundy. And my role in this process was not to appraise the property, but to provide review of the appraisal that was completed. This is a complicated assignment. Its not as simple as, you know, just a simple land appraisal. There probably isnt any such thing as a simple land appraisal. Its the hardest thing to get right in the world. And to commissioner makras point, i started in the same place frankly. Its like you cant have land worth zero, near zero. That just doesnt make sense. But when i dug into it, what i realized was that were at a point in the market where and ive been appraising San Francisco real estate for 30 years, the bay area realty for 30 years. I have never seen a market where all of the fundmentals are so strong and yet a type of project is not financially feasible. But rental housing right now in San Francisco is not financially feasible. Almost no one is Going Forward with it. Unless they have legacy projects, have other reasons for doing it. It just doesnt pencil out. Most of the sites are trading for condominiums. Pretty much the only Residential Projects that are feasible are very, very highend luxury condos. So, you know, as an appraiser, i put my hat on and go, well, the highest and best use of this property should be a condo site. Well, that may be the case or you hold it until the rental market is better. The problem is we dont have that option here. Were locked into a rental project, number one. Number two, were lock into a rental project with b. M. R. On site. Thats more expense than paying the in lieu fee. We have an onerous b. M. R. Requirement of 20 of the units at 80 of the a. M. I. Now compared to one of the two comps that they had on there, which was 13. 5 at a 50 a. M. I. , thats almost a 35,000 cost im sorry, thats about a 10,000 cost to the project. The third or fourth thing is we have the special tax, mentioned as well. Well, actually if you do the math on it, its about a 35,000 hit to the value of the property compared to Everything Else in the market, that doesnt have that. Taken together the b. M. R. And the special tax requirement knocks about 45,000 off the value. If you start at the 100,000 kind of benchmark, for a marketrate unit, you get down to the 55,000 range pretty quickly. Then you knock off the lease holds value that they because its not a feeowned project. It cant be. And suddenly you get down to this 10 million range or so. Now is 5 million the right number . I dont know. Is it within the range of reasonableness for this project, given all of the complexity of it, i think it is. I think particularly and ill be honest. I dont like residual approachers. I dont like developer approaches. Theyre not im not saying any of that happened here. I think the appraisers did a confident job and we have a lot of back and forth, productive from all parties involved in this, in trying to figure out whats the right number. But when you come up with a land residual that points to a significant negative value on the land, it says right away were not Going Forward with this. The market uses residual approaches all the time. They cant get financing, loan committees wont approve it if it doesnt meet the flesh holds. Just circle back for one second to say if any other a site that was not in this particular situation, where it had to be a prepaid ground lease, had to be rental, had the higher b. M. R. Requirement, all of these other factors, you could simply sit and wait. You could say, well, well just park on it for a while and wait. Or well pursue different kinds of entitlements. We dont have that option here. The only option you have, you either go forward with it now or you wait until later. Which, you know, in San Francisco for 30 years, theres, you know, land values have only gone up, except for one property type. Theyve actually started to crater a bit for multifamily residential, because the b. H. R. Requirements are getting onerous and for all types of real estate, costs are significantly outpacing the escalations in rental rates. Rental rates are flattening out. More units are coming online than getting absorbed. Vacancy is pushing up, concessions are coming up. Not just in San Francisco, but throughout the bay area. Because i worked in Silicon Valley as well. In fact, they had rents go down a little bit,. 3 in santa clara county. So whats happening now is youve got a dynamic where it occurred to me the other day, rental housing is not viable or feasible in San Francisco, without some sort of a subsidy. That means that if you have to build rental, maybe your land isnt worth anything in terms of a marketvalue analysis. That seems a little bit hard for me to understand. It seems to be where the market is at. Im not sure if you keep having 6 , 7 , 5 to 7 Construction Cost increases every year and rents are starting to flatten out or maybe only going up 2 a year and the projects were marginally feasible before, theyre not going to be feasible Going Forward. So it may be its entirely possible that we may not see a time where marketrate, multifamily housing, on a rental basis, makes financial sense. Im not saying thats the case for sure. We may have a downturn that may change the dynamics of the construction trades and all that. The disparity between costs and rents. We reached an affordability threshold. A ceiling in terms of how much even theres only so many highpaying tech jobs that will pay 3,000 for a studio. Okay. 4,000. I think thats adequate. Thank you. So i just want to end it and im going to cede the floor to the next commissioner. I think that was very, very helpful to hear that. I think you have given some background and important background substantive of how we got to the 5 million. I still stand in terms of believing that i think this project needs to move forward. We need to look at it holistically. We may not be technically totally correct, as you said, very hard to predict the future. Its a question of whether we want to move forward or not. I vote to move forward. Thank you. Commissioner gilman. I absolutely think we need to move this project forward. I think right now im aware of hundreds and hundreds of residential units that are permitted and waiting and folks i know in the forprofit Development Community are not moving forward with residential rental, due to a variety of reasons. One, our requirements to Construction Costs. I dont see at least in the fallacies i in the analysis i see. I think its critical we move forward and capitalize on a strong, Strong Office component right now to make that possible. So the questions i had are just more for my own knowledge. I just wanted to check in since i wasnt here when we approved the d. D. A. I wasnt on commission. Im assuming the phasing is part of the d. D. A. , the phasing cannot be changed . Thats correct. It can only be changed by coming back to the commission. Okay. So do we anticipate when you say midterm versus nearterm, on your slide 3, im curious what midterm means and if we anticipate seeing this as an issue for building number 2 . Very good questions. I put up the slide that youre referring to. The nearterm are buildings that are either in construction, building 12 or have approved designs associated with them. And thats e2 and a. We expect building two and d to come next. We have begun design on both of those buildings. One is a equipment, one is an apartment one is a condominium and one is an apartment. And c2b is the longestterm condominium, we dont believe we know brookfield is eager to move forward to get the phase complete. I put it in that category. It doesnt have a design associated with it, its the next term of parcels. Okay. But theyre all part of phase 1. Rebecca asked the question in a different way, apologize. Is midterm that youre back in commission in six months, 12 months, 18 months . I guess my question is, if the market is having such a downturn, are we going to see the same problem with building number 2, no office to anchor it . Very good question. So i think we anticipate building 2 and d. And c2a to 2 and d. To come this year. C2a we expect the developer onboard soon. And then c2b towards the end of the year. Your point is well taken. We may have a similar problem with building 2. We expect some sort of creative solution with brookfield. We dont know yet what we dont know until we do the appraisal. Anything to add . I think i just want to address. Its looking like why did we agree to prepaid leases. And i think we use the concept with mission walk and this project. It was an innovation that we used. And that was to help us and, of course, depends on where the market is in the cycle. But that was to help us, as i recall, conceptually, to give the port greater value, so that we could we could offset against the Developers Capital and return. Yes. I think we should not forget that concept. Now say, oh my goodness, if we havent used that, we could use the normal lease value. At the time it appeared that that was a way for us to offset being able to pay back the developers return faster. So that was some economic value to the port. Gotcha. Am i correct . Absolutely. Do not forget that concept. Thats the reason we did about it. I think we started with mission rock . Absolutely true. Theres a lot of were talking about the challenges of transacting and sort of difficulties in the deal. But theres actually a lot of value and benefits in the deal you approved. One is that we can be having this conversation to transact an apartment in this economy, when no one else can do so. So were able because this project is on public land to look at the office, plus the apartment and make a decision to go forward with both. And the c. F. D. Taxes that were concerned about holding back value, those taxes are critical for us to repay infrastructure and provide Sea Level Rise protection. So if we look at the deal on balance, and furthermore port staff is incentivized more than any party to transact quickly. Because we want to see the projects move forward. So we can repay the developer investment. So there are many things about this transaction while were struggling with this phase today, that are incredibly innovative and were able to be in the marketplace when other private sector, similarly situated parties are just not able to do so. So absolutely the prepaid concept was to maximize the ports ability to pay back the developer quickly, to get out of the 18 return. And there are multiple sources of revenue to the port from this transaction. Rent but also the taxes as well. So i did appreciate your comment in remembering why we chose prepaid leases. So do you anticipate a similar problem when we come back with building 2 and building d, building dwill be the valuation will be out of whack and much higher, because condominiums are what people can build and the rental housing is going to be lower . Were looking at that right now. And i i dont want to get too far ahead of myself. Were definitely anticipating this. And bringing this deal to you, were looking down down the roat the next couple of parcels and trying to be forwardthinking. Is there an affordability requirement on building 2 . Yes. All of the rental at pier 70 has a 20 inclusion. Average a. M. I. Of 80 . I really appreciate the remarks from our thirdparty appraiser. Thank you for laying the ground work of what sort of the market is in. I have a lot of friends in the forprofit real estate market. And no one is moving forward on their transactions, due to the climate. Most people are sitting on their entitled properties right now. So i am very supportive of us moving this forward. Thank you. Vice president adams. First of all, i want to thank commissioner makras for his presentation. I told president brandon, my whole issue was it was a lack of conversation prior to coming to the public. I had an issue with that. And and i was very frustrated with that. Sometimes we jump a couple of stems steps ahead. As commissioners we have an obligation to the public and sometimes we get ahead of ourselves. When we held this thing over, you know, i listened to the 28 million and we had this conversation and stuff. I met with mike last friday and we talked and we waked through this issue. I was very frustrated. I told mike, thats not a lot of money. We talked about it. And he just he was just very honest about it. Where its at right now for the value. And i think maybe in some worlds, i can appreciate what commissioner makras said, we can get 28 million. In this situation, were not going to. I think we have to make the best out of it. Its just kind of how it is right now, right. Its kind of like how the world is now with the coronavirus, right. A lot of things just happening now in the economy. A lot of things. Thats kind of how it is. Im going to support it. Because i looked i think last week commissioner woo ho really dug down into it and i was really starting to understand it. I think its both pieces together. And when you look at the big picture and plus im for affordable housing. So im in favor of supporting this. And i want to appreciate the guy that came up and laid out a couple of other things that i kind of got a clear vision of it. And just as a port, this is our job and our business as commissioners, right. But it is what it is. So i dont know if at some point it will get better. But im going to support this. Thank you. Rebecca, thank you very much for this presentation. And i know a lot of work has gone into this. And i know there are a lot of questions. And i just want to say how happy i am that we have commissioners that ask questions. That, you know, really want to know what it is were doing and why were doing it. So i really want to thank you for the work that youve put into this. And looking at this and everyone has said, its a complicated project. Its a complicated deal. I think that we are extremely lucky that the Office Environment is doing so well. Yes. And that we have that little hedge. You know, as tim said, when you think about it, you know, how does that much land have a value of a Million Dollars. How is that even possible. And the fact that we were able to get up to 5 million, i think thats wonderful. Now if i thought we could get anywhere past the 11 million, i might say lets hold this over. [laughter] but i think at this point its been gone over with a fine toothed comb and this is where we are. And if we want to move forward, then we need to do something now. But what i do want to say is with the midterm phase, the next phase, i think you guys should bring it to us sooner rather than later. Because if its a discussion, like weve had over this one, its going to take time to find a resolution. It cant be were losing money by not moving forward. So im just saying be prepared for the next round to come to us sooner rather than later. Whenever the appraisal is done and whenever we need to start negotiating. But i, too, right now will support this moving forward. And so with that, im going to ask for the vote. All in favor . Aye. Any opposed . No. The resolution has passed with four and one no. Item 13 b, request approval of portrelated transaction documents for the California Barrel Company llc. Mixeduse project located on the former potrero power station site bounded by 23rd illinois and 22nd streets and San Francisco bay. Including port of San Francisco shoreline and adjacent lands referred to as portions of sea wall at 349, pier 72 and 23rd street, including 1, consent Development Agreement between the city and the c. B. C. , two, approval of lease with c. B. C. To use port lands for public parks and open space and publicly accessible ways, including an option to impress public trust easement on privately owned shoreline land and a portion of 23rd street leading to the hor line. Three, delegation of a Authority Executive directer to enter into one or more memoranda of understands with various city agencies, including the San Francisco Public Utilities commission, the San Francisco Public Works Department and the department of public work inspection relating to each agencys role and responsibility perform and four, adoption of environmental findings, including a mitigation, monitoring and reporting program and a statement of overriding consideration pursuant to the California Environmental quality act. Good afternoon, commissioners. David with real estate and development. Im joined here today by the potrero power station team enrique, aaron and tina. And also joined by city staff and port staff, including john from economic and workforce development, mike martin. And i just want to show my appreciation for eileen, carol and sam who have been extremely helpful in pulling this together. I was in front of the commission at the last Commission Meeting two weeks ago. Im going to try to keep the meeting the presentation brief. But just wanted to give you an introduction to the project. The ports role in the project, the location and the plan. And then the actions that youll be taking today. So pier the potrero power station is located south of the pier 70 project. That you just were considering. Its in a 29acre site. Mixeduse development and many aspects, very similar to the pier 70 specialuse district project. Within the 29acre project site, there are several different owners. The blue, which is the primary portion of the site, is owned by california barrel corporation. Part of the potrero power station team, the purple which includes 23rd street and the areas along the shoreline are the port projects, which are subject to this approval today. And then theres some other areas, including the red area, which is will be essentially craig lane, which is alley way that splits the property both between potrero power station and port land, also a part of the approval today. As discussed last week, the landuse project is a mixeduse project. The yellow is the residential with approximately 2,600 units. The blue is the commercial office, life science and lab space, approximately 1. 5 million square feet. The hatched area is either hotel or residential at about 240,000 square feet. And theres about 100,000 square feet of ground floor retail spread throughout the building. And approximately five acres of parks illustrated in green, including those on if the port property. The potrero team at the last Commission Meeting covered all of the community and port benefits. Obviously housing is a big one on the site. There are several Community Facilities planned. There are the parks and the extension of the blue greenway, transit, childcare, and, of course, jobs. The approvals today include a consent to the Development Agreement, along with the city and the developer. Approval of the lease, which comes with an option to impress the public trust on the area outlined in yellow, which is both a portion of 23rd street and additional shoreline parks. Delegation to the executive director to enter into an m. O. U. With other city agencies regarding permitting. And then, adoption of the environmental findings consistent with the seqa. That concludes my presentation. Myself and the project team are available for any questions. Thank you. Thank you. There is Public Comment on this item. Cynthia gomez. Hello. My remarks are brief. Research analyst with local 2. We are the hotel and hospitality and workers union. And we are in support of this mixeduse project. Commonly known as potrero power takes station. Hotel use is contemplated at this project. And a very creative use of some of the building use of the power station. With the project sponsor, regarding the jobs of this eventual hotel, specifically a guarantee for a fair and neutral process for the eventual hotel workers, if they wish to be represented by a union. Griefs agreements such as these create for those in the Hospitality Industry to fight for respect and dignity on the job, Affordable Health care benefits, a we ask that you grant all the necessary approvals for the project. Thank you. Thank you. Keith goldstein. Good afternoon, commissioners. Im the chair of the the eastern neighborhoods c. A. C. Im a potrero booster board member and also president of the potrero Merchants Association for the last 230 years. [laughter] lived on potrero hill for 45 years. And a couple of weeks ago i sat on a Planning Commission, where they listened to this project. There are about 50 Community Members that spoke in support of this project. It really was quite inspirational. There was nearly a voice in descent. Its not something i have seen before. This is because of the Remarkable Community outreach that the developers have undertaken. I often walk around the neighborhood and see that the developers chatting with any member of our community. Theyd have these office hours in our local hubs and coffee shops where anybody could come and chat and talk about their concerns and they listened to them. And we dont just have what we typically expect a project at the waterfront, the green space, the bay trail. Tremendous affordable housing. 2600 units. 30 affordable is fantastic. Its what we all ask of everybody, in our neighborhood. But theyre actually coming through, you know, with so many of them low low level of income. The preservation of building a, the wonderful building. Ive been a contractor in the city for over 40 years. I know i didnt expect them to preserve that building actually. Because its tremendously expensive to do that. The homeless prenatal program. You know, coming up with ideas like this. Two childcare centers, a 25,000 square foot ymca there. This is a tremendous project for our waterfront, for our community, and for the whole city. And i hope you feel the same way. Thank you very much. Thank you. Is there any other Public Comment on this item . Hello, commissioners. Thank you for taking the time. Im a dog patch resident. I live three blocks from the project site. Ive been in dog patch for 18 plus years. And keith and i have served on the eastern neighborhood c. A. C. Together. So good to see you keith. We are both in support of this project. I dont want to go over all of the details, because keith has done a great job of saying them. The Community Around the project actually really supports this, not only for ourselves but for the south, the neighborhoods to the south, as we look toward developing more of the waterfront as a whole. Please introduce yourself. Bruce. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you again. Is there any other Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. A motion, right . We have one. Oh, okay. Can i have a motion . A motion. Second. Commissioner woo ho . Well, thank you. I think we had a very Planning Commission very impressive presentation. I dont have that many questions Going Forward. I have seen the site previously. So we actually did look over and see your site, which is right next door. We were actually looking at the Orton Development rehabilitation. So theyre all together. So it was impressive to see and it would be wonderful to see how the whole neighborhood will come together and it does seem like it is coming together and a lot of collaboration and planning together. I guess just based on the previous conversation and given this project is really not within our purview and ask out of curiosity, in terms of the fact a lot of Residential Housing coming up and the affordability has been mentioned, 30 , whether theres any concerns, looking similar to what we just went through with the discussion of whether this can move forward, because of the situation with multifamily Housing Development and the market right now. Commissioners, john low with the office of economic development. Yes, weve tried to adjust the uncertainty of the Market Conditions in a number of ways. One is theres a 30year term, which is clearly a long period of time for one of those Development Agreements. Secondly, its about the program is balanced, the residential and commercial. So with over 1. 5 million square feet of office and or life science in the entitlement, as well as up to 2600 residential units, with the inclusion of the pg e property, we feel theres theres room to be flexible and selling to Market Conditions. Weve actually placed a mechanism in this agreement, that ensures if the market is only there, for building and office for a time, that theres still a b. M. R. Requirement that accrues and owed at certain points to the city, with that office development. So, yes, given almost certain uncertainty, if you will, and the future, we tried to bake in certain kind of basic parameters in terms of city benefits and b. M. R. In a market that is exists, as it does now, at least for housing an life science. I dont know if you want to add any more . No. Well, i think it sounds like youre taking a flexibility approach and were obviously not here to examine all of the numbers. Were just talking about slivers of port property. Given the heated discussion we just had earlier, just concerned about how this project is addressing the same issue. Thats all. Understood. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner gilman. Thank you. The presentation was wonderful last time and great to see you back here for an action item. And i support it. Thank you. Commissioner makras . No questions. Ill be supporting it. Vice president adams. Commissioner woo ho said you heard about the debate heated debate. This is a prepreliminary of whats happening tonight in South Carolina at the president ial debate. No, im good. I support it. Thank you. David, thank you for the presentation. I dont think much has changed since the last presentation. But i just want to say how excited i am about this project. And the fact that it has almost a billion dollars in community benefits. I think thats phenomenal. So i, too, will support this. Yes. All in favor . Aye. Any opposed . Resolution 2012 has been approved. Item number, new business. New business. We will be scheduling an informational to go over the Capital Budget of last year and our achievements, as well as open projects for discussion. Is there any other new business . Is there any other new business . Any Public Comment on new business . Motion to adjourn, madam president . All in favor . Aye. We are adjourned. Good afternoon and welcome to the regular hearing for wednesday, february 19th, 2020. I will remind members of the public we do not tolerate any outbursts. Please silence cell phones and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, state your name for the record. I see the poster boards are up but theyre blocking the monitors. So at least the one in the back should be moved so