Bay Crossings Interview

Chuck Foster Speaks His Mind

That suggestion has surfaced on many occasions, not only in the Bay Area, but also around the country. There’s been resistance, and I think a lot of it is because airports are community assets, and communities have pride in their assets. So I think it will be an uphill battle to ever move toward the control becoming regional as opposed to local. But that doesn’t preclude alliances between airports. You’re hearing more and more about it in the corporate sector, particularly as you look at the airline industry and the maritime industry. So I think to protect the asset that is of value to a given community or particular jurisdiction, and not fight an uphill battle of regionalization, the effort should really focus on building alliances and fostering greater coordination between airports and other transportation/planning agencies.

Ocean carrier operators and containership builders believe that ships in the future are going to pretty much remain at a draft of about 46 to 47 feet. Maersk Shipping Lines’ largest vessel has a draft depth of 47.5 feet, but generally the industry is remaining in the range of 46 to 47 feet, and deepening our channels to minus 50 feet in depth will more than adequately meet what we believe are the needs of the industry. What we are going to see are vessels that are wider and longer, but not necessarily deeper draft. When a vessel requires deeper draft, it means that significant changes must be made to the propulsion system of these vessels. I think there will be discussions regarding faster vessels. Undoubtedly, if they’re going faster, they’re looking at reducing the draft depth, but today what we’re seeing are wider and longer vessels. These larger containerships will carry up to 8,000 containers.

We want what works best overall for the transportation industry. If overall it appears that there should be a greater alliance with surface transportation systems, we’re open to options that would improve the overall level of service to the public.

I disagree that the Port was unenthusiastic. We were a party to the efforts of the Authority and, in fact, funded a number of initiatives (public relations video, consultant services) associated with the work of the task force. The Port has been a party to, and very much engaged in, the efforts of the Water Transit Authority right from the beginning. Our concern is urgency. We feel a real urgency to address the movement of express mail and express cargo by ferry system rather than adding more trucks to an already congested highway system. We embrace the efforts of the Water Transit Authority. We must all operate with a sense of urgency.

I’ve learned in working with partners, businesses and friends that you don’t start with issues that polarize relationships because if you do that, you don’t get to the next step. At this point, the Port’s interest has been to work to identify a system that works. I’ve had two delegations of air cargo and express mail carrier operators travel to Vancouver, British Columbia, to spend a day on a Hovercraft operated by the Canadian Coast Guard. This technology can move significant volumes of cargo. We’re still exploring other technologies and looking at other cities around the world in terms of what systems they’re using to move express mail cargo. We are more interested at this point in identifying a system and doing due diligence on such a system. The end user will ultimately determine whether a ferry system could reasonably be integrated in their respective cargo business operation.

Before 1927 there were questions as to how the waterfront was being used in the context of public versus private participation and ownership. We’re way beyond that today, and I don’t like to waste a lot of time on history that I don’t think brings any value. I focus on moving forward and, in that vein, the Port and the City are arm in arm in terms of how we best utilize our waterfront to better serve the needs of our Bay Region.

I think there were some concerns earlier on but I’m delighted to say that the Mayor has been extremely supportive of the Port. He has engaged in a number of meetings and conversations with our customers and offered to help market and promote our airport, seaport and commercial real estate development. The Mayor expects the Port to be accountable, and we will respond accordingly.

The Oakland City Charter in its wisdom set aside the Port as an enterprise organization, meaning we have to operate in many respects as a business. Although the Port is a public agency, I have never believed that it precludes the Port from being productive, efficient and run like a business. We have a commitment to our stakeholders in much the same way the corporate community has a commitment to its shareholder. Our commitment is somewhat more complex. We’re not only interested in a bottom line return on investment, but also interested in addressing social, cultural, economic and environmental issues affecting the City of Oakland, the Bay Area and the region.

There are only two storefronts vacant, and they are under negotiations, so there will be no vacancies in the Jack London Square Waterfront area within the next 45 to 60 days. We are engaged in an exclusive negotiating agreement with Ellis Group to further develop the Jack London Square Waterfront area. We are currently demolishing the Jack London Village site in preparation for a 20 to 25 story full service, first-class hotel development with retail elements within the next 18 months. So the Jack London Square Waterfront is on the move. Literally, every parcel of land that we have available to offer to the market is in some state of negotiation at this time. Jack London Square has done very well and will continue to do so.

If you track the history since 1986, when the Port built out the first phase of Jack London Square, we unfortunately entered the market at a time when there was a significant downturn in the market. So that project hit the market at a very inopportune time, but we carried the project through the difficult period and we are delighted with what has happened to date.

Yes, there are. The next phase will be the Oak Street to Ninth Avenue terminal. Ultimately, the third phase will include Embarcadero Cove and the Fruitvale area. There will be office, recreational and retail development in the seven to 10 year timeframe.

Oak to Ninth Avenue – five to seven years. The Request for Proposals for the Oak to Ninth Avenue development should be sent out in 60 days. A number of Waterfront tenants have long-term leases, which will result in some delay in the redevelopment of some Waterfront parcels.

Shippers needs the Port of Oakland’s long waterfront for what they do but residents of the whole Bay Area want access to your magnificent waterfront too. Is it difficult to balance these two seemingly mutually exclusive aims?