While everyone is eyeing the Raiders’ future, Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf is quietly moving ahead with plans for a new waterfront home for the Coliseum’s other tenant, the A’s.

Schaaf’s idea is to sell the A’s on Howard Terminal, the site north of Jack London Square that has underwhelmed the team’s ownership from Day One.

“I think Howard Terminal would be a fantastic site for a ballpark — one of the most spectacular pieces of real estate in the world,” Schaaf told us Tuesday as NFL owners gathered in Houston to determine the Raiders’ future.

The A’s would prefer a new stadium to themselves at the Coliseum site — but Schaaf wants “an urban, walkable ballpark” that’s closer to downtown.

Howard Terminal is one of five sites the city suggested in a 21-page report it recently handed to the team. The list also includes two spots at Laney College, one at Brooklyn Basin south of Jack London and the site of a U.S. Postal Service facility in West Oakland.

For Schaaf, the likely best bet is still the 50-acre Howard Terminal, which has the advantage of being owned by the Port of Oakland. Only about 14 acres would be needed for a ballpark, with the rest open for other potential development.

It’s the same site that former Mayor Jean Quan pushed on the A’s, who noted that it’s a mile from the nearest BART station and not particularly accessible to a freeway.

In fact, A’s managing partner Lew Wolff has long considered Howard Terminal a nonstarter, telling us two years ago that “it would be easier to build on Treasure Island.” He has pointed to toxic wastes that will require an expensive cleanup, as well as to the megabucks that would be needed to make the ballpark transportation-friendly.

Reached Tuesday, Wolff remained as noncommittal as ever.

“You are catching me in the middle of a six- to eight-month study period,” he said. “We are studying all the options — including the Coliseum and Laney College — and we just want to complete our analysis.”

Schaaf, however, is forging ahead — pushing to have Howard Terminal incorporated into the city’s downtown area plan, which would allow the industrial site to be rezoned for a ballpark and make it easier to clear environmental obstacles.

“It saves the user tremendous time and money,” Schaaf said.

In addition, the city has taken steps to pave over the toxic sections of the terminal property.

The city would probably also have to come up with at least $90 million in infrastructure improvements, including funding for a car and foot bridge connecting Howard Terminal to Market Street east of the railroad tracks.

What’s more, the property is part of the California Tidelands trust, so the city would have to gain state approval to build a ballpark there — just as the Giants had to get the OK for AT&T Park years ago.

Wolff is eager to move ahead regardless of what happens with the Raiders.

He and A’s majority stakeholder John Fisher — whose team receives in the neighborhood of $35 million a year in revenue sharing from Major League Baseball — could soon find themselves under financial pressure from their fellow owners either to get moving on a new money-generating stadium or to sell the team to someone who will.

Super-oops: The taxpayer cost of San Francisco playing host to the Super Bowl just jumped by $638,000 — bringing the estimated total to between $4 million and $4.6 million.

It’s seems that when the first set of numbers came out last week, the Municipal Transportation Agency forgot to include the 90 parking and traffic control officers who will be needed to keep the cars and buses moving before and after events — and also staff the street closures that will come with the weeklong celebration before the Feb. 7 game in Santa Clara.

News of the cost hike came just days after Mayor Ed Lee’s office released projections showing the city will actually make money playing host to the Super game.

Supervisors Jane Kim and John Avalos have questioned the city’s help for what they consider a “corporate event.”

“No party is worth leaving San Franciscans with a fiscal hangover,” Kim said. “This cost analysis should have been conducted before the city agreed to host Super Bowl 50 — not three weeks before the event.”

The mayor’s office said there will be no hangover.

“We are confident that the city will experience a significant economic bounce, especially in the typically slow month of February,” said Lee spokeswoman Christine Falvey.

The new numbers follow a pledge by the Super Bowl 50 Host Committee — which raised $50 million in private money for the big party — to kick in $500,000 if the city winds up in the red.