BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
WEDNESDAY – October 14, 2009
MINUTES
I. CALL TO ORDER
8:00 A.M.: Chairman Garcia, presiding
Commissioners Present: Commissioner Larry R. Aikins; Secretary Lorianna Kastrop; Vice Chairman Richard S. Claire; and, Chairman, Ralph A. Garcia, Jr.
Commissioners Absent: Commissioner Richard A. Dodge
Staff Present: Executive Director, Michael J. Giari; Special Counsel to Port, Francois X. Sorba; Director of Finance & Administration, Cynthia D. Hampton; Manager of Operations, Donald K. Snaman; Assistant Manager of Operations, Eric Napralla; Accounting Clerk, Linda Hawkins; Administrative Assistant, Margaret Astesano; and, Executive Assistant, Rita F. Artist
Commissioner Aikins led the Pledge of Allegiance.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A Motion to Approve Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 23, 2009 was made by Commissioner Claire and Seconded by Commissioner Aikins. The motion passed by a unanimous voice vote of all Commissioners present. Commissioner Dodge was absent.
III. CLAIMS:
Commissioner Aikins inquired about a payment made to Prestige Protection. Executive Director Giari explained that Command Security, the Port’s security provider for approximately seven years recently merged with Prestige Protection. A name revision to their contract is scheduled for the next Port Commission meeting.
A Motion to Approve Claims was made by Commissioner Aikins and it was seconded by Commissioner Kastrop. The motion passed by a unanimous voice vote of all Commissioners present. Commissioner Dodge was absent.
IV. RESOLUTION
A. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID FOR THE MAINTENANCE DREDGING OF WHARVES 1, 2, 3, AND 4 PROJECT; AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR SAID WORK AND DIRECTING RETURN OF SECURITY DEPOSITS – (MANSON-DUTRA, JV)
Click here to view the Staff Agenda Sheet for this item
Executive Director Giari commented that the Board approved contract documents for this project September 2009. The project consists of dredging Port berths to a depth of minus 34 feet with a one-foot over dredge allowance. The Port’s engineer, Moffatt & Nichol, has reviewed the bid and is recommending the Port award the contract to Manson-Dutra, JV.
Don Snaman, Manager of Operations, presented the staff report explaining that Dutra Dredging Company and Manson Construction Company have formed a joint venture, Manson-Dutra, JV. Their total bid for this project was $813,963. Snaman said there are no other dredging companies in the Bay Area and that it would be cost prohibitive for a dredging company from outside the Bay Area to bid this project. Staff has reviewed the status of the contractor’s license and bid bond and found all to be in good order. Staff recommends execution of this agreement with Manson-Dutra for the Maintenance Dredging for the Wharves 1, 2, 3, and 4 Project, which is expected to be completed by November 30, 2009.
A Motion to Adopt was made by Commissioner Aikins and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Claire. The motion passed by a unanimous voice vote of all Commissioners present. Commissioner Dodge was absent.
RESOLUTION
B. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE E DOCK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AT THE PORT OF REDWOOD CITY AND AUTHORIZING RELEASE OF PAYMENT AND PERFORMANCE BONDS ACCORDING TO THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT WITH VALENTINE CORPORATION
Click here to view the Staff Agenda Sheet for this item
Executive Director Giari commented that the E Dock Improvement Project was finished by August 31, 2009 and the Port’s engineer, TranSystems, has provided a letter of recommendation for acceptance of the project.
Don Snaman, Manager of Operations, presented the staff report explaining that Valentine Corporation was awarded this project on October 23, 2008. The contract was for the removal of the wooden deck, boat hoist, and pilings serving access to E Dock and for the installation of a new bridge connecting the existing abutment to the existing gate house, strengthening the existing abutment, two new concrete pilings, and new utility connections. Three change orders were approved for additional work or changed conditions. There were some excusable delays but Valentine completed the project efficiently and expeditiously.
A Motion to Adopt was made by Commissioner Claire. It was seconded by Commissioner Kastrop. The motion passed by a unanimous voice vote of all Commissioners present. Commissioner Dodge was absent.
V. MOTION
A. MOTION APPROVING REQUEST FOR CHANGE ORDER REQUEST 001, AS DESCRIBED IN LETTER REQUEST DATED SEPTEMBER 18, 2009 TO AGREEMENT WITH AANKO TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (AGREEMENT DATED JANUARY 28, 2009) AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION THEREOF
Executive Director Giari explained that Aanko Technologies, Inc. has provided professional security and training services since 2003. The Port Commission approved a contract for Aanko in January 2009. Today’s action is a proposed change order for that contract, which focuses primarily on the Golden Guardian exercise, a major exercise in preparation for Port security and emergency preparedness.
Steve Longoria, Aanko Technologies, Inc., began his presentation with a brief history of the Golden Guardian (GG) Statewide Exercise, created in 2004 by Governor Schwarzenegger. It is the largest Homeland Security exercise program of its kind in the nation and the Port of Redwood City has been selected as one of three major port venues in Northern California for the GG-2010 exercise. The maritime/ports theme is designed to test port capabilities for response, recovery, and intermodal lines of communication. Longoria briefly reviewed multiple events that will be taking place in the State during the exercise. He stated that public and private entities will work together as part of the response, including the City of Redwood City, San Mateo County, FEMA Task Force 3, the California National Guard, and local fire departments from Woodside, Belmont, and Redwood City.
The Port of Redwood City was invited by the State to participate in the GG-2010. Participation in this exercise has resulted in Aanko having additional State and local integration meetings, and development of a number of Port exercise concepts, objectives, and scenarios. Aanko’s requested change order is for $18,808 for the GG-2010 exercise and $1,600 for Facility Security Plan changes. Longoria explained the funding received for the GG program to date. He stated that 100% of the funding needed in 2010 is covered by grants, which Aanko has helped the Port to obtain.
Commissioner Kastrop commented that the Golden Guardian exercise is very important and suggested that information about the program be put on the Port’s website to increase public awareness about the exercise and why the Port is participating.
A Motion to Approve was made by Commissioner Aikins. It was seconded by Commissioner Kastrop. The motion passed by a unanimous voice vote of all Commissioners present. Commissioner Dodge was absent.
VI. PRESENTATION/REPORT
by City Manager, Peter Ingram, and Blake Lyon, City of Redwood City Planning Department
Executive Director Giari explained that in November 2008, the Planning Commission and Port Commission held a joint session to discuss industrial land uses that are part of the Port and the Bayfront Area. The Port and Seaport Industrial Association (SIA) continued to follow the General Planning process. The Port participated in a public workshop event and has attended several meetings of the Planning Commission, giving our input on the General Plan. During this time period, DMB Saltworks was proposing to develop the Cargill Salt Lands, gathering input from the community, and holding meetings.
In June/July of this year, DMB Saltworks submitted a development application for a proposed project. That triggered a requirement to amend the General Plan. At that point some concerns were raised about the possible impacts of the proposed project on the Port. The City Manager, Peter Ingram, offered to give an update, both on the General Plan and on the DMB Saltworks project to the Port Commission and explain how they relate to each other.
A. Update on Redwood City’s New General Plan
Peter Ingram, City Manager, commented that one of the top priorities of the City Council is to put together a General Plan by the end of October. Our current General Plan was done in 1990 but it never had an environmental review prepared and attached to it. Technically, under State environmental law, there is no project with our current General Plan. That’s one of the problems that we are trying to fix –making sure that all the current standards for environmental review are met. This new General Plan is all about transportation corridors, density, smart growth and transit. The new General Plan pulls attention to changes in land use and changes in zoning so that higher density, more transit oriented development can occur.
Commissioner Claire asked if there has there been any new dialogue with the State on the 101/84 interchange. Ingram replied that most of the dialogue on 101/84 has taken place within the Transportation Authority of San Mateo County and the agencies that are more regional or sub-regional focused. The conundrum, of course, is the changes needed to make that interchange effective are very expensive.
Commissioner Kastrop asked if she was correct in understanding that under CEQA you have to explore four different alternatives of the General Plan, one being the preferred project approach. Blake Lyon, City Planning Department, explained that the General Plan has a number of elements. Under the CEQA Analysis, the no project alternative would just be carrying forward the existing General Plan. CEQA also puts into effect the need to look at superior environmental alternatives. All alternatives are evaluated to determine their environmental impacts.
Ingram said that last year the Council decided to take the Cargill properties out of the General Plan because there were so many complexities about the property and no application had been submitted as yet. They are doing a General Plan for everything else in the City. We really felt that we needed a housing element that is certified by the State and a CEQA document that is certified by our Planning Commission to enable our downtown and our corridors to move forward.
Ingram concluded that if the Council approves the General Plan as a “project” and does an environmental review, we expect that by the first or second quarter of 2010 the new General Plan would be in effect. By that time, if the process of reviewing the application for Saltworks continues to move forward, we will be in the early stages of notice of preparation and scoping for the environmental review of the Saltworks proposal.
Commissioner Claire asked where the Port fits into that process of the General Plan and when will comments from the governing body of the Port be heard. Lyon responded that there is an opportunity now to comment on the Draft Plan. The Port will be engaged in the environmental review of the Plan itself as a kind of reviewing authority or agency.
B. Update on Industrial Saltworks Application Review Process
Blake Lyon, City Planning Department, commented that they have been working with consultants, Hart-Howerton. Our goal is that we will come back with evaluation reports that look at Tier One issues of water, transportation, and jurisdictional overlays in greater detail with the expectation of establishing adequacy of this development proposal. Right now we’re trying to look at those three items as pivotal issues in determining whether or not we can move forward with this development proposal
Lyon’s presentation covered the Saltworks development proposal. He stated that the development proposal is on the City’s website at www.redwoodcity.org. The development application includes three specific submittals at this point: a General Plan amendment, a zoning amendment, and an environmental assessment. It is expected that a specific plan and development agreement will be developed, if appropriate. The City Council has directed the Planning Department to determine the adequacy right now. They’re not in a position to make any decisions on whether or not the project will get approved.
Lyon presented aerial photographs/graphics of the existing site including a land use map identifying a variety of land uses and discussed various access routes to the site and the challenges they present. A development proposal would also need to look at Seaport Boulevard in regards to a proposed ferry terminal, the Pacific Shores office, and the new Westpoint marina.
Ingram commented that it’s not hard to imagine how difficult it’s going to be to integrate a development application that needs to go through a long review and approval process with the existing or yet to be new General Plan, and our unfinished work with our Bayfront planning process. Ingram said that Greg Greenway, Seaport Industrial Association, had asked via email; “How is the City going to manage its way through a process that integrates the new General Plan with the Saltworks property and the Bayfront, the Port, and all of the waterfront?” Ingram’s response was that there are two things that will drive that. One is the General Plan; the other is to continue to look at the whole Bayfront, not just Cargill, to really focus on the future of what we want our waterfront to be. The Port is a key piece of property and a key operation right in the middle of that.
Lyon commented that the development proposal addresses sea level rise and some of the concerns that are presented in the new legislation AB-32. Jurisdictional issues include many different agencies that have some kind of review consideration over development of the site and a number of different permitting processes, one of which would be addressing various levee issues.
Commissioner Kastrop stated that during the community process leading to the Saltworks Proposal the Port Commissioners gave input that industrial and light industrial or buffer uses would be compatible with the Port within a several hundred foot distance of Port property and industrial uses. Yet, the proposal itself has the closest uses to the Port as office and commercial, which are incompatible uses to industry. Where in this process does it allow for compatible uses to be incorporated into the design relative to the Port? When can the proposed project be subject to changes and how does the Port become a part of that process? We need to anticipate any problems with office, commercial, and other uses that are adjacent to the Port.
Lyon responded that land use issues fall under Tier Two of the evaluation process. City staff has taken the approach to first focus on Tier One items. Unless we identify a reliable source of water, land use discussions and compatibility are really moot. The same can be said for the transportation and the jurisdictional issues. Identifying the Tier One issues will give us the framework and the foundation to begin to address some of the concerns that you have raised.
Commissioner Claire commented that a committee from the Port Commission needs to work very closely with the Planning Commission to make sure that we all understand where we are in the General Plan process and also with the Saltworks specific plan process.
Clem Molony, Seaport Industrial Association, also relayed a question from Greg Greenway, regarding the General Plan process. Last year there was a lot of land use discussion and numerous meetings about the wisdom of buffering between incompatible uses, transition zones, and light industrial uses adjacent to Seaport Boulevard. Greenway asks, “What about all those inputs to the General Plan land use element distinct from the Saltworks development proposal? Will they be respected when the development proposal is reviewed?
Ingram answered, “Yes”. The staff and the design team are committed to a process that looks at the Bayfront as a whole and that picks up all of those previous inputs.
VII. PUBLIC COMMENT:
Clem Molony, Environment Safety Manager, Lyngso Garden Materials, 19 Seaport Boulevard, Redwood City, CA 94063 commented that for the past three years, Port staff, Port Commissioners, industry executives, Seaport Industrial Association, and I have made it clear to DMB and Cargill principals that an appropriate buffer is essential to the success of Cargill’s project. However, there is a glaring error in the development proposal placing housing 300 feet from Port operations, placing one million square feet of Class A office space 250-300 feet from Port operations and putting housing 300 feet from industrial operations near Blomquist Street. There is significant noise and bright lights that are part of industrial operations both during the day and at night, which is why it is such a glaring error to put housing and offices across the street.
We know the Port benefits the City and the Peninsula economies, primarily through waterborne and rail commerce. BCDC’s Bay Plan states the Port of Redwood City will be here in perpetuity. It is essential that the developers accept these Port operations as part of the planning process.
Molony asked the Commissioners to take the Port’s position strongly to DMB; and to take action in the coming months to assure that their professional peers and other boards and committees hear that this error needs to be corrected when the process moves forward.
John Bruno, DMB Associates, 1700 Seaport Boulevard, Redwood City, CA commented that future planning of the Cargill site is now in the hands of the City’s experts. DMB and our partners, Cargill, couldn’t be more thrilled to have the City embrace the application as it stands right now. This is a starting point, as is any development project.
We understand the conflicts between industrial and office users. As we go through this process of determining compatible land uses, we certainly are not going to be putting forward uses that are not compatible to ongoing Port operations. We actually look forward to the opportunity of engaging with the Port Commission, Port staff, SIA, and the City as we go forward determining what the future will be as it relates to the Saltworks plan.
VIII. MATTERS OF BOARD INTEREST:
Chairman Garcia was pleased to announce that the Port’s tonnage was up after his first full month as chairman of the Port Commission.
IX. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
Executive Director Giari announced that at 10:30 a.m. today a Rededication and Ribbon Cutting Ceremony for the Port’s Launch Ramp Facility will be held on Chesapeake Drive. He invited all present to attend.
Giari next reported that on Wednesday, October 21, the Port and Marine Science Institute (MSI) are co-hosting a Chamber of Commerce mixer at 5:00 p.m. at the MSI site.
X. CLOSED SESSION:
At 9:41a.m., the Board adjourned to Closed Session to conference with Legal Counsel – Potential Initiation of Litigation under Government Code Section 54956.9(c). (one case)
At 10:02 a.m., the Board reconvened. Chairman Garcia announced that no action had been taken by the Board.
XI. ADJOURNMENT:
At 10:04 a.m. Chairman Garcia requested that the Commission adjourn to its next regularly scheduled Meeting of October 28, 2009.
A Motion to Adjourn was made by Commissioner Aikins and was seconded by Commissioner Kastrop. The motion passed by a unanimous voice vote of all Commissioners present. Commissioner Dodge was absent.
City of Redwood City | Tide Chart | Contact Us |