Address the toxic condition has the land obey rewhat studies were done and sort of the current status. Im happy to do. We went through this action when we constructed herself ones park in the late 90s but with the expectation of commissioner brian denouncing done this is new to many commissioners. So herself responses head park like most of the San Francisco shoreline was made up, up file. Most of the fill is rock and gravel and some construction and debris like asphalt and concrete and bricks, metal it is fill. And when and also it included other materials liken green waste and a municipal refuse. It decompose in forms through the nature decomposition process. Before we constructed herself responses park in coop with the instructions of the city. We did an economical investigation and determined it selfpose a hazards to construction workers or park visitor. It was approved by the public health. After we constructed herself responses head park in 2004 we do the more comprehensive will
In neo 15 well hit the ground running. Strapgs plan another important piece not only for our project but for the community in the whole were working with the Transportation Planning will Work Together with the larger effort to come up with a solution. Of course, i mentioned sustainable ability we believe we have an opportunity weve mentioned before to pursue 2k3wr0u7bd breaking. Fwhuns a lifetime at any point to create from the ground up substantial measures that arent seeing none, nationally given the fact were starting with a ground slate look at the cooling systems and the feasibility of a centralized trash collection for example. Not only look at them but we have a Development Partner who is earnest at working them at the site. Excuse me. The last two items i want to talk about. Excuse me. Is an early activation at the site 0 activate a portion of the lot you see to bring ugly to the sit that can show its potential and introduce the site to the neighborhood and put it into a 0 pros
The land obey rewhat studies were done and sort of the current status. Im happy to do. We went through this action when we constructed herself ones park in the late 90s but with the expectation of commissioner brian denouncing done this is new to many commissioners. So herself responses head park like most of the San Francisco shoreline was made up, up file. Most of the fill is rock and gravel and some construction and debris like asphalt and concrete and bricks, metal it is fill. And when and also it included other materials liken green waste and a municipal refuse. It decompose in forms through the nature decomposition process. Before we constructed herself responses park in coop with the instructions of the city. We did an economical investigation and determined it selfpose a hazards to construction workers or park visitor. It was approved by the public health. After we constructed herself responses head park in 2004 we do the more comprehensive will vegetates to see the post constr
The site. Excuse me. The last two items i want to talk about. Excuse me. Is an early activation at the site 0 activate a portion of the lot you see to bring ugly to the sit that can show its potential and introduce the site to the neighborhood and put it into a 0 prospective that allows people to see it is a neighborhood focus. Identically today thats it a vacant parking lot. We want to b begin this to be a project coming forward. And finally, Public Outreach were reaching anti since 2007 this year for sure with such viruses groups as the may or may not Advisors Committee and the mission bay and the state Lines Commission amongst other hed the city groups. Various chamber of commerce from the africanamerican champs to reach out to as many as possible. Were reaching it out the neighborhood groups and look forward to those the amendment in the coming year. Excuse me. I would like to introduce jack bear from the giant to talk about the prospective from our partners good evening, commissio
Negotiation and in terms of what you see in terms of office rent and in terms of parking. I want to note that for the record and the port staff to note that were here to optimize in the intent we have to still go through New York Times to summarize the port staff asked us to look at the bulk head from our own theoretical base submittal and we justified the rent a little bit and looked at the whole believe you were discussing the buckle head to make it a feasible project. Given the seismic and sub you structure costs that would be triggered and came up with a yes on both. Youre correct the first part of the report is a good guidance in the report we can tweak the bulk head project a little bit more. Okay. Any other comments from commissioners. Just one. Lets maybe our directory can answer this one. If negotiations with t m j falls off the cliff do we have a back up and a for the normal process if we dont concluded negotiations we go to the next bird and they welcome that if the opportun