Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: AC Hosting in SF: Pier 30-32 Nixed?

  1. #1

    AC Hosting in SF: Pier 30-32 Nixed?

    As Gavin Newsom begins his switch from a real job to a ceremonial one, he has a few matters left to which he has to attend. A key development issue, according to Matier and Ross, is San Francisco’s America’s Cup bid. As the winner of the last Cup, Larry Ellison gets to decide where the next one is held, and the only US bid comes from SF. A couple different proposals have come in, both of which would exchange the development rights for select piers for the cost to rebuild them, a cost that the City can’t take on at the moment. A similar kind of development project is already underway in the relocation of the Exploratorium, which will move east from the Palace of Fine Arts to Piers 15 and 17.

    Initially, the project’s location was going to be Piers 48 and 50, which are adjacent to AT&T Park’s main parking lots. This shifted to Piers 30 and 32, just south of the Bay Bridge, where Red’s Java House is located. Ellison has nixed the 30-32 idea, perhaps because he doesn’t want to work right next to/underneath a bridge.

    The Giants are objecting to 48-50 because construction work there could be disruptive to the Giants’ plans for those parking lots, to which they have development rights. It’s highly likely that some of that land may have to be used as a staging area for construction equipment and the like.

    It gets more interesting when you consider that Oracle has been a charter sponsor of the Giants, with its name on the ballpark’s suite level since the beginning.

    So who’s going to win out? Surely the Giants can delay their plans for a couple of years while the waterfront beautification project happens. After all, the two key uses that the Giants have identified, a 5,000-seat concert hall or a NBA arena, aren’t exactly going to materialize for quite some time. The region isn’t begging for a 5,000-seat venue. The Bill Graham Civic Auditorium (7,000) is old but serviceable, the Warfield and the Fillmore cover sub-3,000 crowds quite nicely. On the other side of the bay Another Planet has cornered the market on mid-sized venues, as it has the Greek Theatre in Berkeley (5-8,000) and Oakland’s Fox Theatre (2,800). In the South Bay, San Jose State’s Event Center holds exactly 5,000. As for an arena, well, that would be easier to deal with if Larry Ellison owned the Warriors, you think? Even then, the W’s lease runs at least through 2017, with the team owners being liable for the remaining debt service if they don’t sign extensions that would keep the team until 2027. If the Giants decide on a concert hall, their dreams of a SF arena will vanish. If they decide to wait for an NBA team, they’ll be waiting quite a long time.

    This round should go to Larry Ellison. A project like this comes around very rarely. If the Cup is staged locally, Ellison will be a very busy guy, probably too busy to entertain Oakland partisans’ dreams for him to wrest the A’s from Wolff/Fisher and build a ballpark in Oakland. Seriously, can anyone out there point to a single quote that can back up Ellison’s interest in the A’s? ~It's not the size of the website, it's how you use it! ~

  2. #2

    The vision outlined in the SWL 337 Design and Development Proposal for China Basin

    What has never been addressed is where the business currently located at Pier 50 would move to, and would they
    want to relocate? Meawhile, Pier 80 just South looks more and more attractive, and would not require major modification of
    existing structures or CEQA restrictions>

    Pier 50

    Pier 80, The Final Frontier? ~It's not the size of the website, it's how you use it! ~

  3. #3
    Mogul Masher Kris O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    SLC mostly, but SFO & ORD too
    as long as they dont disturb The Ramp, I don't care where they put the compounds.

  4. #4
    despondent correspondent Photoboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    SF Bay Area
    Blog Entries

    Kimballs been snooping about too!

    Sea of Green, Sea of Orange?
    By kimball | Published: November 8, 2010
    So I tracked down Jon Haveman, one of the guys who authored the study predicting that America’s Cup racing will boost the Bay Area economy by $1.4 billion, and I reminded him that my friend, SF Supervisor Chris Daly, doesn’t buy it.

    We’re at the tipping point of committing San Francisco to the Cup, so Jon, WTF?

    “When I look at figures for a Super Bowl,” the man said, “I believe the assumptions are wildly overblown. But I think we could have understated the upside of an America’s Cup, and that was the risk we chose. At every turn, we tried to be conservative. The numbers are so big for an America’s Cup that, even when you’re conservative—even if you underestimate—the numbers are better than good.”

    Haveman, of Beacon Economics, worked with Sean Randolph of the Bay Area Council Economic Institute to produce the study for the office of San Francisco Mayor (now Lt. Governor-elect) Gavin Newsom, whose people on Tuesday will begin the dance with the Board of Supervisors, working toward a binding agreement between the city and America’s Cup organizers. The prospect sounded a bit more dynamic and exciting when I read it via Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross, who write a political column for the San Francisco Chronicle—they’re way-doggies better connected at City Hall than I am—but I have it that the city and the team are still talking, still in negotiations so we’re not . . . there . . . yet.

    Things sound increasingly hopeful for AC-N-SF, and an announcement can’t come soon enough for frustrated would-be challengers, or even frustrated U.S. candidates for the defense. Nobody wants to be quoted, but the back-channel talk boils down to something like: If you’re not a billionaire who can tell one of your secretaries to cut a check for a Cup campaign, how do you get traction? It’s like mountain climbing on gravel. How can you make a successful sponsorship proposal now without more to go on, and how can you keep waiting when you’re supposed to have a 72-foot catamaran on the water in 2012?

    Well, you can’t. So let’s hope we’re finally getting somewhere. I figure the Defender is as eager as anyone else to get on with dragging the America’s Cup kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

    Artemis is in, of course. Torbjörn Törnqvist gave his secretary the word to cut the check, and the team announced on Monday as the fourth America’s Cup challenger ever to carry the colors of the Royal Swedish Yacht Club. Names you know include CEO Paul Cayard, helmsman Terry Hutchinson—the man with a seemingly endless supply of silver-frame Kores—and designer Juan Kouyoumdjian.

    But, getting to this sea of green, sea of orange theme, political writers Matier & Ross also tell us that there has been some backroom arm wrestling over the Pier 50 site where America’s Cup Defender Larry Ellison wants to base the teams. Apparently the owners of the San Francisco Giants–AT&T Park is a prized tenant of the Port of San Francisco–have been wanting to expand their sports/entertainment franchise into new areas, and they too have had an eye on that broad-shouldered facility so close across the waters of McCovey Cove.

    San Francisco for the past week has been truly a sea of orange.
    Meanwhile, the Port of San Francisco has such enormous needs that it can’t hope to meet all of those needs out of either an America’s Cup match or an expanded Giants sports franchise at Pier 50, so it has to get as much as it can. It’s not as though the southern waterfront piers are going to rehabilitate themselves.

    (I note that a Giants representative showed up at City Hall in October to support the America’s Cup before the Land Use subcommittee of the Board of Supes.)

    I’m in the habit of telling people that an America’s Cup match on San Francisco Bay will be highly disruptive, and absolutely wonderful. The report by Haveman and Randolph has a different way of saying the same thing: “Even though there is some potential for disruption, San Francisco’s economy has long focused on and benefited significantly from tourism, including large-scale events. The city’s residents have tussled with the effects of tourism for a very long time, and most sincerely hope to for a very long time yet to come.


    The study, which you can read in its entirety HERE, took two months, June and July, and had to make assumptions in the absence of certainties about the number of teams that will be involved and how long the teams might actually stay in San Francisco.

    “It was complicated,”Haveman said, “because San Francisco is so different from previous venues. It’s a larger tourist attraction than Valencia. It’s a bigger attraction than Auckland or even San Diego, but we drew heavily on Valencia as a guide to how many visitors to expect, and we drew heavily on Fleet Week as a guide to how many local spectators to expect. That said, the participants [with their teams and families and need for services] are the primary drivers of benefits to the community.”

    Conspicuous differences from past practice?

    “In Valencia, each team built its own hospitality suite,” Haveman said. “I’m told that is simply not in the plans here, that Cup management will supply a hospitality suite. There are significant space constraints on the San Francisco cityfront. In that regard it’s not like Valencia. There’s plenty of space in Alameda, of course, but then you’ve separated the teams from the public.”

    The report is too big a bite for most readers, but here is an excerpt that illustrates the methods employed:

    The benefits to San Francisco’s visitor industry would come in several forms:

    Hotels. As of October 2009, there were 32,976 hotel rooms available in San Francisco. During the likely months of the America’s Cup, June through September, occupancy rates in the city are at their very highest. Between 2005 and 2009, occupancy rates averaged roughly 85%. This implies the availability of some 4,800 rooms for America’s Cup spectators. Using typical room occupancy data of 1.77 individuals per room, this suggests the availability of hotel lodging for roughly 8,500 spectators on any given night during the America’s Cup. Over the course of three months, assuming full occupancy, this suggests that at an average room rate of $180, the hotel industry could potentially receive an addition to normal revenues of up to $77.8 million.

    This calculation appears to provide an upper bound on the addition to revenues as it assumes that all hotel rooms would be occupied. However, it is frequently the case that room rates increase significantly during major events in the city. During periods of peak occupancy, such as special events, hotels are often able to command rates that are significantly higher than during less busy times of the year. Although the extent to which rates may increase is uncertain, the calculation above nonetheless provides an indication of the type of benefit that local hotels stand to gain. It should be noted that if the America’s Cup were to run for three months, this would imply the accommodation of an additional 764,848 visitor days. The number of additional visitor days in Valencia in 2007 was significantly more than this, suggesting that hotels will likely have very high occupancy rates during the event and that the estimate above may not be too far off the mark.

    That the available hotel rooms may be insufficient to accommodate all of the potential Cup spectators suggests that many would be encouraged to find lodging outside of the city or in private homes or residences. Both are quite probable, with hotels and inns in the North, East, and South Bay all likely benefitting from the influx of spectators.Another possibility for providing additional lodging is the use of cruise ships as floating hotels, a concept that has been implemented at other large-scale events, including previous America’s Cup races and the Sydney and Barcelona Olympics. Although dock space is limited at the Port of San Francisco, smaller cruise ships can accommodate 900 to 1,000 guests, and larger vessels up to 5,400. Adding one or two cruise ships could absorb a significant portion, if not all, of the excess demand for hotel space in San Francisco.

    The race would occur during the shoulder season, as vessels transition from summer service in Alaska (mid-May to mid-September) to winter service in the Caribbean. While some ships are based in San Francisco, most are based in Vancouver. It is therefore feasible for ships heading south from Vancouver to stop in San Francisco to address America’s Cup demand. As passenger counts drop off toward the end of Alaska’s high season (around mid-August), attractive passenger loads in San Francisco could induce cruise lines to reposition their vessels earlier (in late August or early September) and stay longer. Vessels unable to be accommodated at San Francisco’s cruise terminal could potentially berth at alternative space on the waterfront, or anchor out on the Bay with shore access provided by tender. Typically, ships serving the market in this way would be chartered for the purpose.
    " I just found out my nest egg has salmonella" Photo Gallery

  5. #5

    A step closer

    The chances of the next America's Cup being sailed with a backdrop of the Golden Gate Bridge, Alcatraz and the Coit Tower improved dramatically Tuesday.

    City officials finalized a host city agreement with the Golden Gate Yacht Club, which backs America's Cup defender BMW Oracle Racing. The agreement quickly was submitted to the Board of Supervisors, which must approve it. Six of the 11 supervisors are co-sponsors of the agreement.

    The Board of Supervisors voted 9-2 on Oct. 5 to approve a term sheet that was a precursor to a host city agreement. The city pledged in the term sheet to help raise $270 million from corporate sponsors to help defray the costs of staging the regatta.

    "I think this is more than significant," said Tom Ehman, a spokesman for the GGYC and member of its America's Cup Committee. "It's a big step forward for the 34th edition of the Cup. There can be no better venue for sailing than San Francisco Bay. Personally, I and the GGYC are very excited by the prospects and delighted with this latest development."

    Mayor Gavin Newsom agreed.

    "There is no better place and no better partner for the America's Cup than San Francisco," Newsom said in a statement. "With this agreement, San Francisco is making its commitment to the America's Cup in return for the team's commitment to bring the world's oldest international sailing competition and all the jobs and long-term economic benefits that come with it to San Francisco. This is the opportunity of a lifetime we must not let pass."

    San Francisco's only competition is Italy. Valencia, Spain, which hosted the America's Cup in 2007 and in February, no longer is under consideration for the main regatta, Ehman said. However, the Spanish port could host a preliminary regatta.

    "I think it's fair to say that if Italy does not match or exceed what's on offer from San Francisco, I would expect San Francisco be given the nod," Ehman said. "We need to wait to see if the supervisors approve it and we need to wait to see what the final offer from Italy is."

    Italy is in the mix because Club Nautico di Roma is the Challenger of Record, which represents the interests of all challengers.

    A final decision from GGYC and BMW Oracle Racing is expected by the end of the year. BMW Oracle Racing is owned by software billionaire Larry Ellison, the CEO of Oracle Corp.

    Ehman said GGYC was "pleasantly surprised" that six supervisors co-sponsored the agreement.

    He added that it was as difficult a negotiation as he's been involved with in his 30 years of association with the America's Cup.

    "The city has been tough and meticulous," he said. "I think it's a fair and good agreement, and assuming the supervisors approve it, then I think that will put San Francisco right at the forefront. I think we'll have a similar agreement from Italy and then we can make a final evaluation."

    The next step is a Budget and Finance Committee hearing on the agreement on Dec. 1.

    Valencia hosted the 2007 America's Cup, which was the most recent traditional multichallenger regatta. It also hosted the 33rd America's Cup in February, when BMW Oracle Racing routed Alinghi of Switzerland. That rare one-on-one match was the result of a bitter, 2 1/2-year court fight between BMW Oracle Racing and Alinghi over rules and other issues.

    The next America's Cup will be sailed in fast, 72-foot catamarans with wing sails.

    SF GATE Article ~It's not the size of the website, it's how you use it! ~

  6. #6

    The contest to host the next America's Cup is down to two cities, and the clock is ticking on a decision.

    San Francisco and an undisclosed Italian port are the two remaining potential sites to host sailing's premier regatta in 2013, The Chronicle has learned. The host of the last cup, Valencia, Spain, has slipped from contention, at least for now.

    Race organizers intend to announce their decision by the end of the year. Mayor Gavin Newsom on Tuesday introduced legislation to the Board of Supervisors that would create a binding agreement if San Francisco is picked, demonstrating the city's commitment to an event projected to create about 9,000 jobs here and infuse $1.4 billion into the local economy.

    Approval of the agreement "will determine if we have a bid and if we can be competitive. Without it, there is no America's Cup in San Francisco," Newsom said.

    Local software billionaire Larry Ellison's BMW Oracle Racing team, sponsored by San Francisco's Golden Gate Yacht Club, captured the cup in February off the coast of Valencia and gets to decide the location, timing and type of boats for the next regatta.

    The host city agreement Newsom submitted incorporates a nonbinding proposal the board already approved on a 9-2 vote in October. It commits the city to granting Ellison's team long-term development rights on three waterfront properties south of the Bay Bridge to be used as race facilities: Piers 30-32, the adjacent parcel Seawall lot 330 and Pier 50. In exchange, Ellison's team, which is creating an "event authority" arm to handle the commercial side, will pay an estimated $150 million to rehab the decaying piers, dredge around them and install new breakwaters and utility lines.

    The deal also calls on the city to assist an organizing committee of business, civic and other leaders with securing $270 million in private sponsorships for BMW Oracle's event authority to host the race.

    Escape clauses
    The agreement contains escape clauses, including if state environmental regulations "require unacceptable modifications to the event." Changes can be made by mutual agreement, including shifting many of the race facilities north of the Bay Bridge from Pier 19 to Pier 29 if both parties agree.

    Newsom contends the America's Cup proposal is a "once in a lifetime opportunity" to rehab portions of the city's waterfront that have been deteriorating for decades because the port lacks funds to repair them, and development projects like a cruise ship terminal at Piers 30-32 have fallen through.

    "If we said no, I think it would be a black eye on the reputation of this city," Newsom said. "I think 10 years from now we'd be asking the next, next mayor why she hasn't been able to do anything with the piers."

    There's a strong cross-section of support on the board for the proposal - Supervisors David Chiu and Ross Mirkarimi, Newsom's sometime political adversaries, are among six supervisors co-sponsoring it.

    Whether approvals occur in a matter of weeks - the time frame race organizers have set out - remains to be seen. Newsom, scheduled to resign in January after being elected lieutenant governor, has made securing the 34th America's Cup one of the final goals of his mayoral career.

    Some supervisors, most notably outgoing District Six firebrand Chris Daly, have questioned whether the potential costs incurred in hosting weeks of races that stretch over two years is worth the economic benefit.

    A city-commissioned report by the Bay Area Council Economic Institute and Beacon Economics found that hosting the regatta would generate $1.9 billion in economic activity and create about 12,000 jobs nationwide, with the vast majority of that coming in San Francisco. It ranked the global sporting event's financial impact behind only that of the Olympics and soccer's World Cup.

    Projections questioned
    Daly has argued such assessments are overly optimistic and questioned the real impact on jobs, housing stock and city finances. Several supervisors have requested a clear breakdown of the out-of-pocket costs to the city for things like lost rent revenue on port property, the cost of moving existing tenants and the port's maintenance facility and the increased strain on Muni and police services. The event is projected to attract 2.6 million spectators.

    "Those questions don't go away," Mirkarimi said. "There are hard questions that are not resolved, but I am confident the answers are forthcoming."

    A fiscal feasibility study, along with analyses by the board's budget analyst and the city controller, are expected to be discussed at a Dec. 1 supervisors budget committee hearing, Mirkarimi said. Portions of the deal also need to be approved by the Port Commission. The mayor's office hopes for a full board vote by Dec. 7.

    "You're talking about hundreds of millions of dollar in economic activity, and there will be a price to pay for that; let's be candid," Newsom said. "But it's a small price in terms of the reward, which is huge. It's incalculable."

    Read more: ~It's not the size of the website, it's how you use it! ~

  7. #7

    Mayor Newsom's Press Release

    11/9/10- Mayor Gavin Newsom, Board of Supervisors President David Chiu, Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi and other members of the Board of Supervisors today introduced San Francisco’s Host City Agreement, a final step in the consideration process to host the 34th America’s Cup. The Host City Agreement sets forth essential terms and conditions agreed upon by the America’s Cup Committee of the Golden Gate Yacht Club and the City of San Francisco in accordance with the Protocol for the 34th America’s Cup and the Term Sheet adopted by the Board of Supervisors by a vote of 9-2 on October 5, 2010.

    “There is no better place and no better partner for the America’s Cup than San Francisco,” said Mayor Newsom. “With this agreement, San Francisco is making its commitment to the America’s Cup in return for the Team’s commitment to bring the world’s oldest international sailing competition and all the jobs and long-term economic benefits that come with it to San Francisco. This is the opportunity of a lifetime we must not let pass.”

    In addition to Mayor Newsom, Board of Supervisors President Chiu and Supervisor Mirkarimi, the Host City Agreement was also initially co-sponsored by Supervisors Michela Alioto-Pier, Carmen Chu, Bevan Dufty, and Sophie Maxwell. The San Francisco America’s Cup Organizing Committee is also a party to the Agreement.

    Hosting the America’s Cup in San Francisco would bring a beautiful backdrop, predictable winds, world-class visitor amenities and enormous spectatorship opportunities that the natural marine amphitheater of the San Francisco Bay offers. In order to provide the Team with the highest level of certainty possible regarding a number of important issues, including the venue plan, key financial terms, sponsorship opportunities, schedule and event logistics, City staff have negotiated host city agreement with the team for endorsement by the Board of Supervisors.

    “We as a City are coming together to put into place the commitments necessary to host the 34th America’s Cup in our Bay waters,” said Board of Supervisors President David Chiu. “The economy of the entire San Francisco Bay Area will benefit exponentially from hosting the America’s Cup in 2013, and we are preparing to bring this world class sailing race to our world class waterfront.”

    “San Francisco is the only location for this event,” said Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi. “Having been exposed during my youth to sailing and the America’s Cup, I know we have everything race organizers need, including the expertise and will, to host the ‘World Cup’ of sailing and make this event a historic success. I look forward to the Budget and Finance Committee hearing on the Agreement on December 1st , where we will hear concrete answers to the questions of how the America’s Cup will benefit the people of San Francisco and the greater Bay Area.”

    The Host City Agreement envisions the use of piers along the southern waterfront and leaves open the possibility of exploring and studying other sites if there are opportunities to deliver the facilities more quickly, using fewer resources on both sides, and further enhancing the America’s Cup experience in San Francisco.
    The possible alternatives are part of the Fiscal Feasibility study and will be included in the project’s California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review.

    Hosting the Event in San Francisco would generate significant public benefits for the City, including providing a catalyst for the repair, improvement and productive reuse of City piers along the City’s central and southern waterfront that are currently in a such state of grave disrepair that there is no other viable plan to pay for the improvements. Hosting the America’s Cup would also generate an enormous amount of economic development in a very short period of time, including over 9,000 jobs and more than $1.4 billion of new economic activity.

    There are additional terms in the Host City Agreement that expand upon the concepts in the Term Sheet including a number of suggestions made by members of the Board of Supervisors and the public during the prior hearings, and they include:

    Ensuring that the Event Authority receives future development opportunities commensurate with the infrastructure improvements necessary to build world class America’s Cup Village facilities on San Francisco’s public waterfront.

    As the specific plans for the 34th America’s Cup have not been finalized, the parties anticipate certain changes may be made by mutual agreement prior to the execution of the Venue Leases, the Development and Disposition Agreements for the Legacy Leases and/or the Transfer Agreement.
    Ensuring the highest environmental standards and sustainability programs are used for the America’s Cup event as well as the infrastructure improvements as well as using local labor and workforce for the infrastructure improvements undertaken by the Event Authority.

    Securing MOUs from key third parties, specifically federal and state agencies with oversight and are key parties to a successful hosting of the America’s Cup in San Francisco These include: the Coast Guard, FAA, FCC, GGNRA, Homeland Security, BCDC, to name a few.
    Affirmatively stating that the Board of Supervisors and/or the Port of San Francisco will have future discretionary approvals for the execution of the Venue Leases, Development and Disposition Agreements, Legacy Leases and Transfer Agreement, as well as any potential CEQA appeals.

    Mayors November 9th Press Release ~It's not the size of the website, it's how you use it! ~

  8. #8

    Mondays Matier and Ross:

    Lt. Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom, who wants a deal to bring the America's Cup regatta to San Francisco in place before he leaves his job as mayor in January, plans to introduce a binding agreement between the city and race organizers at the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday.

    But this deal isn't going to please the Giants.

    The world-famous yachting race needs space and piers to build boats and show them off to the public. The first proposal was to center the operations at Piers 48-50, which need costly infrastructure work. In exchange for paying to shore up the piers, the city would give up the long-term leasing rights for the site.

    The Giants complained that might interfere with their plans to build in the area, a development that could include a new basketball arena or concert hall.

    So Newsom started pushing for the America's Cup to be put on the northern waterfront, where the piers don't need much work.

    Alas, the new deal was summarily rejected Thursday by representatives for Oracle's Larry Ellison, who, as the current cup winner, gets to make the final call.

    Now Newsom has little choice but to stick to the original plan at Piers 48-50 if he hopes to get a deal done before the clock expires.

    As for the Giants, they declined our request for comment, saying that they preferred to negotiate in private.

    The SF Chronicle today released this image of things to come. Not much room for Giants to expand their empire.

    Hmmmmm ~It's not the size of the website, it's how you use it! ~

  9. #9

    Some Meat from AC 34 Host And Venue Agreement

    6. Infrastructure Works.
    6.1 If the Venue Leases and the DDAs for the Legacy Leases and Transfer Agreement are entered into by the City and the Authority, the City shall perform or cause to be performed the following:
    (a) The City shall cause the US Army Corps of Engineers to demolish and remove Pier 36 by no later than January 1, 2013.
    (b) The City shall remove the substructure, pilings and footings at, or adjacent to, Pier 36, and shall dredge the water area between Piers 30-32 and Pier 38, or, in the alternative, the water area between Pier 14 and 22½ if agreed by the City and the Authority, to a minimum depth of five meters by no later than January 1, 2013. However, if the Authority obtains a cost estimate to perform this work and it is less than the City's estimate to perform the same work, the Authority may (but is not obligated to) perform such work at the City's cost, not to exceed the amount of the Authority's cost estimate.
    (c) The City shall remove Sheds A, B, C and D from Pier 50 as soon as possible but no later than six months following CEQA certification. However, if the Authority obtains a cost estimate to perform this work and it is less than the City's estimate to perform the same work, the Authority may (but is not obligated to) perform such work at the City's cost, not to exceed the amount of the Authority's cost estimate. The City and the Authority, prior to finalizing their scopes of work for their Infrastructure Works, will meet to coordinate schedules so that work by both Parties may proceed simultaneously if possible.
    (d) The City shall complete the Brannan Street Wharf by no later than June 30, 2013.
    (e) The City shall ensure under the People Plan, whether by temporary traffic controls or temporary or permanent pedestrian crossing improvements, that the movement of people across the Embarcadero roadway near Piers 30-32 can be accommodated safely and efficiently.

    6.2 Under the applicable Venue Lease, the Authority shall perform or cause to be performed the following:
    (a) All pile replacements, substructure strengthening and deck repairs on Piers 30-32 and Pier 50 as may be required by applicable laws and other work required for the staging of the Event or as the Authority otherwise deems necessary or appropriate.
    (b) The construction of breakwaters generally as shown on the Space Plan, with such modifications thereto or deletions thereof as the Authority determines to be necessary or appropriate for the Event;
    (c) All repairs and improvements to the other Event facilities as the Authority deems necessary or appropriate. The Authority may refrain from making any repairs or improvements (except as required by Sections 6.2(a) and 6.2(b so long as the Authority’s use of the particular Event facility lawfully can be accommodated without such repairs or improvements. The City shall cooperate with the Authority in regard to mitigating repair and improvements costs for the Event facilities that will not be subject to the Legacy Leases, it being understood that the City is not expecting the Authority to undertake significant repairs or permanent improvements for the Event other than as required under Sections 6.2(a) and 6.2(b). In addition, the Authority has the right to defer the infrastructure work under Sections 6.2(a) and 6.2(b) to the start of the applicable Legacy Lease so long as the Event facilities can be used for the Event in accordance with applicable codes.
    6.3 The City expects that the Authority or the Authority Affiliates will expend $150,000,000 or more in both hard and soft costs of performing the Infrastructure Work for which the Authority is responsible. In negotiating the Venue Leases, the City and the Authority shall identify a minimum scope of work under Section 6.2 (the “Authority Infrastructure Work”) that satisfies the pile and strengthening requirements including seismic upgrade City’s expectation.
    6.4 The work in Sections 6.1 and 6.2 is collectively referred to as the “Infrastructure Work.” Before the commencement of any Infrastructure Work, the Party responsible for such work shall obtain from their contractors' sureties, customary payment and performance bonds for the completion of such Infrastructure Work. Any proceeds from the performamce or payment bonds will be used to complete the Infrastructure Work.
    7. Long Term Development Rights.
    7.1 In consideration for the Authority undertaking the Infrastructure Work under Sections 6.2(a) and 6.2(b) above, and subject to the conditions precedent set forth in this Agreement, the City shall enter into the DDAs with the Authority and/or its nominee(s) under which the City, acting by and through the Port, shall ground lease to the Authority or its nominee(s) all of Piers 30-32, Pier 50 and Seawall Lot 330 under long-term leases (the “Legacy Leases”) and, when the conditions for conveyance are satisfied, fee title to Seawall Lot 330 under the applicable DDA or a separate purchase and sale agreement (the “Transfer Agreement”) as follows:
    (a) The Legacy Leases of Piers 30-32 and Pier 50 shall be for a term expiring sixty-six years after the expiration of the applicable Venue Lease, and the Legacy Lease of Seawall Lot 330 shall be for a term of seventy-five years expiring after expiration of the Venue Lease, consistent with California Senate Bill 815 (subject to earlier termination upon transfer of fee title as required by Section 6.2(g. The Legacy Leases shall commence only after expiration of the Venue Leases of Piers 30-32, Pier 50 and Seawall Lot 330, respectively, and the satisfaction of customary contingencies, including the Authority’s receipt of all necessary approvals for, and evidence of adequate financing for, the proposed development and clearance for such development following environmental review under CEQA. The Legacy Leases shall, to the extent required by law, require a determination of consistency with the Public Trust by the State Lands Commission or the California Legislature.
    (b) Following the expiration of the Venue Leases, the Authority or its nominee shall have the right to use Piers 30-32, Pier 50 and Seawall Lot 330 subject to the conditions set forth in the DDAs for the Legacy Leases and the Transfer Agreement. The parties do not yet have any particular plans for development of any of Piers 30-32, Pier 50 and Seawall Lot 330. Under the DDAs, the Authority shall have the right to exclusive use of the Long Term Development Sites for interim uses until all conditions to the closing of the applicable Legacy Lease are satisfied. Allowed interim uses shall include any existing use, prior use (such as parking), and any other use that is consistent with applicable law, including CEQA and the Public Trust. Interim uses that are non-trust uses will be allowed for a limited period not to exceed ten years.

    (c) The leasehold title conveyed under the Legacy Leases shall be subject only to the effect of the Public Trust, any exceptions caused by the Authority or Authority Affiliates, and such other matters as the Authority may approve in writing in the exercise of its sole discretion. The City shall be required to remove all other matters affecting title under the Legacy Leases from the title insurance policy issued to the tenant at closing (i.e., upon delivery of the Legacy Lease to the Authority or its nominee).
    (d) The DDAs and the Legacy Leases shall be free of base rent or option consideration. No percentage rent or other additional rent shall be due under the DDAs or the Legacy Leases for the entire term.
    (e) The Legacy Leases may be assigned or subleased by the Authority to any of the Authority Affiliates upon prior written notice to the Port without requirement of the Port’s consent. Any other assignment of a Legacy Lease shall require the Port’s prior written consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed, and there shall be no limitation on the remedies available for the Port’s wrongful withholding of such consent. The Legacy Leases shall permit the premises to be sublet to any person or entity without notice to or consent of the Port. The Port shall have no rights of recapture or participation in assignment consideration or sublease rents. The Legacy Leases shall obligate the Port to grant non-disturbance protection to subtenants on commercially reasonable terms and condition.
    (f) The Legacy Leases shall include reasonable and customary provisions for the protection of institutional lenders who may secure construction or permanent financing secured by one or more deeds of trust on the leasehold estates created thereby, including a requirement to engage in good faith negotiations regarding modifications to such lender protection provisions where the same are customarily required by institutional lenders at the time in question in order to obtain leasehold secured financing.
    (g) The Legacy Leases shall obligate the City withincrement from an infrastructure financing district (“IFD”) comprising the properties subject to the Legacy Leases (including Seawall Lot 330) for the public infrastructure repairs and improvements required in connection with development of those properties. The IFD will issue bonds, the proceeds of which will be made available to reimburse the Authority (or its nominee(s for infrastructure improvements as authorized under applicable laws governing IFDs. The Authority acknowledges that the City will be required to meet specific debt service coverage requirements to issue the IFD bonds and agrees that the City may reserve the tax increment funds required to meet IFD bond debt service coverage requirements for its own use, and that the City may require appropriate financial assurances to protect against the risk that any voluntary downward reassessment of the property within an IFD causes a shortfall in tax revenues pledged to service the bonds or satisfy the debt service coverage requirements. ~It's not the size of the website, it's how you use it! ~

  10. #10

    Dogzilla to live at Pier 80? ~It's not the size of the website, it's how you use it! ~

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts