. . .

president olague: good evening. this is a special joint hearing between the san francisco planning commission and the treasure island authority board. before i take roll, if i can just ask everyone to turn off your cell phones, any pagers, any computers, anything that may sound off during these proceedings, we would very much appreciate it. roll call for the planning commission. president christina olague. >> here. >> vice president ron miguel. >> here. >> antonini.

>> here. >> borden? >> here. >> kathrin moore? >> here. >> and mr. sugaya. >> here. >> president claudine cheng. >> here. >> larry del carlo. >> present. >> john elberling. larry mazzolla. linda richardson and honorable jane kim is not seated tonight. thank you. commissioners, the first category on this joint agenda is public comment on agenda items where the public hearing is closed. and that's an opportunity for the public to speak prior to the certification or the commission's consideration of the certification of the final environmental impact report. that is the only item on this calendar that has already been heard in a public hearing, and the public hearing has been closed. so for all of you who want to speak on the certification of

the environmental document, there are a number of cards, and they're all mixed up. so if the joint chairs would allow, i would ask for those who want to speak to line up in the center aisle. president olague: that is the preferred way of dealing with it. thank you. and just so the public can be aware, this will be your only opportunity to address certification of the e.i.r. once the commission closes public comment in this category and they go into deliberation on the certification, the public hearing will be closed and your opportunity to speak will be lost. madam president? president olague: we'll take public comment tt -- at this time. >> and how much time? president olague: two minutes. >> the president has decided that she will allow two minutes per speaker to address them on the certification of the e.i.r.

president olague: the microphone doesn't seem to be -- >> i'll turn it on. try it now. >> hello. good evening. my name is judy west. i have been a member of the citizens advisory committee to the san francisco public utilities since 2004, attempting monthly briefings affecting the city's water and sewer system. i became alarmed about the treasure island project when i learned recently about the burden that's going to be placed on the p.u.c., which is not highlighted in your environmental review and yet, could seriously impact areas much larger than the subject redevelopment area. and so i want -- before that you conclude that this project will not have a negative impact on the conditions of the mainland sewer system, i would like to see that you review the scope of the proposed citywide

sewer master plan and the sewer and water rates that are going to be required to pay for this. unlike the redevelopment agency, the p.u.c. is an enterprise agency and must generate its own funds from water and sewer rates to fund their operations, as well as upgrades to the system, including $125 million sewer treatment plan that's proposed on treasure island. san francisco is decades behind in repair and replacement of the aging sewer system below the ground on the mainland due to voter-mandated freezes on water rates in the 1980's. the project sponsors are asking the city rate payers -- water rate payers to build an entirely new sewer plan for 8,000 new homes, when we don't have enough money to upgrade the system we have in the bayview, which deals with 80% of the city's waste water for hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses. it's the actual cost of the -- if the actual cost were paid for by the developers or by

infrastructure bonds or whatever and then repaid by stimulating the local economy, these huge investments by the p.u.c. might make sense. but there's already conflicts about the amount of affordable housing required or other public benefits, such that there's no guarantee that city, the developers or the p.u.c., which is what i'm concerned about, is going to be repaid for this investment. [chime] president olague: i just wanted to clarify that this is the only opportunity to speak to the e.i.r. you will have an opportunity to speak to the project at another time in the hearing. >> my name is dick millett. i'm a former president of the boosters neighborhood association. i'm speaking for myself. i just noticed in the little handout here, the project description doesn't address parking. it does talk about 8,000 homes, 500 hotel rooms, 100,000 square feet of office space. i don't believe the ridge can

handle it. i don't think the ferries can handle it that don't exist. i question are we going to charge a toll to help out the bridge, which keeps going up and up, or half a toll, because they'll be using half of the bridge? i live in a neighborhood where we're studying congested parking and it's going to cost me $3 or $6 to move around town. it cuts my ride in happen. are we going to do this with them? i think the plan is not well thought out completely, and i want to see that we have guaranteed transportation. we don't have guaranteed transportation in san francisco . all of these projects that we're doing, where we're increasing the density, we don't guarantee that we're going to have the transportation.

thank you very much. president olague: thank you. >> good evening. my name is paul and i'm a candidate for mayor of san francisco in november of 2011 and i speak on behalf of the citizens of the state of california and object to the whole proceedings where the e.i.r. is being accepted or certified for acceptance, when the property and the title of the treasure island belongs to the people of the state of california, not the u.s. navy. it was not the navy's to sell for $110 million and it's not private developers to develop. this is privatization of the public commons and i object to it. the value of one piece of property at 110 embark darrow is $6 million without any development. that's lands value alone. if you extrapolate that to treasure island, the property

is worth $20 billion, that's b as in billion, 100,000 million. $6,000 million dollars. we sold this or allegedly tried to sell it to lenar for $110 million. this is a rip-off. the ownership issue has not been settled. title has not cleared. the privatization of our commons is something that is extremely serious, especially when it's for private gain. this is something that absolutely has to stop. the land belongs to the people of california and i object to the consideration of the e.i.r. at this time on behalf of the people of california. thank you. president olague: thank you. >> good evening, commissioners and title board members. my name is gail gilman, the executive director of the community housing president buell: and a provider of homeless housing on treasure

island for the last 10 years. . . i'm here tonight to urge you to approve the e.i.r. and also to understand that my comments extend to the rest of the hearing on matters of approving the plan. this is a great opportunity for the city and county of san francisco to create a green transit-first community that will have over 400 units of housing for formerly homeless families and to give those families an opportunity to integrate into a safe, state-of-the-art community and break their cycle of homelessness and poverty. as we all know, many of our supported housing sites in san francisco are in disenfranchised and poor neighborhoods. this will be the first time that an emerging community will embrace individuals living in poverty and homelessness. this is an exciting opportunities as a stea and i urge you to support it. groups like community partnership have been working for over a decade in this partnership, in partnership with lennar and the treasure island developers.

while i know there is controversy and there's always planning and these things move at a rate in san francisco that some might think is slow, i fully endorse this plan and feel that this is the time, particularly with what's happening at the state level, that we move as a community to secure this housing for homeless individuals and the hundreds of units of affordable housing that will be there as well. i urge you to vote yes this evening. thank you. >> hello, my name is louise williams. i'm a local 22 carpenter and i want to approve this -- i want to endorse this project. it would create a lot of jobs, lots and lots of jobs. i am welfare to work. i've been working at least 12 years. and if it can work for me, it can work for a lot of people. and right now in our communities throughout san francisco, we are in dire need of employment all over. please, please push for this

project to happen. thank you. >> good evening, president olague and commissioners from treasure island and planning commission, adrian siebe from carpenter's local 22, field representative. i have here tonight with me brothers and sisters from carpenters local 22. we have more downstairs. these are working carpenters. these are out-of-work carpenters, brothers and sisters. we're all together in this. this is an opportunity that we need to take advantage of. opportunities come and go. the ones you don't take, you never know. this is an opportunity we have to put carpenters to work and local 22 would ask that you approve this e.i.r. and let us go to work. thank you.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is sue vaughn and i'm here speaking on behalf of the sierra club. the sierra club urges the san francisco planning commission to recirculate the treasure island -- the e.i.r. for the following reasons -- the project has changed substantially since it was initially approved by the treasure island development authority and the san francisco board of supervisors in 2006 and then updated in 2010, and then changed also earlier this year. to the sierra club finds that the amount of allowable parking is far too high. residential parking should be no more than one space for every two units. and in fact, caltrans wrote a letter to the planning department yesterday noting that the san francisco-oakland bay bridge is already at capacity and no funds have