we have the project, we can help backfill. there are certain cases, military bases that you have to overcome such a huge structural hurdle, we can say to the state, if you don't put the funding in, we don't have a project. we are clever enough that we have gotten past that hurdle. it lowers the incentive to be an investor. commissioner moore: i looked at san francisco being one of the most active in the state. we have a lot of that visitation valley. including the restructuring of the eastern neighborhoods, we could almost say that each project is a candidate of merit for being able to keep the project.

how do we prioritize within the city itself looking at possible projects? how do we do that? >> we were having this conversation yesterday, that we are looking at these bills. your 100% right. the state will not turn around and say, sorry we took away redevelopment. you are right. the question we're asking is, under what circumstances is the state -- i don't know if it is 100% or a portion. they were able to make an interesting argument about the fact that it is so big, he arguments they made was that they think they will bring economic uses to the pier that would otherwise not appear in california. you're sort of moving around the chairs. you are changing where the economic growth occurs. we have a better case to make a

similar argument. there are things that would not occur but for this action. but the challenge is, whether or not affordable housing is one of those things they will consider to be a high enough priority. i don't know if that answers the question, but what is compelling? president olague: i would like to open it up on this public comment for just this one topic. we will have another public comment period. >> good evening, commissioners. we were formed in 1990 far under the base closure assistance act to create opportunities for homeless people on treasure island. i have had the privilege of working for 16 years to do just that. we have had thousands of people that have been able to rebuild their lives on treasure island.

we have been looking forward to redevelopment to expand those opportunities to an increasing number of people that could access permanent housing, job training, and jobs. with the turmoil coming at the time that it did, it is extremely disappointing for all of us. somehow, the project is able to keep on ticking and come up with a solution. even though it requires a get an affordable housing, we are reluctantly having to go along with that. the project staff, we have always worked together to form plans that we think are workable and held the majority of san franciscans. the housing plan that we will work god will speak to increasing the amount of

affordable housing in later phases so that we can get back to the 30% should the law changes. we are going to be confident that that will happen. this project has so many great of virginities, i think we are willing to move forward. president olague: any additional public comment on ifd's. >> tim cullen on behalf of the housing action coalition. we're playing catch-up. needless to say, it is with deep sadness that we are watching the loss of this affordable housing. it is awful. but we have to be clear that this is a direct consequence of the economy and the state and the state cozy awful budget situation.

as a consequence of having a redevelopment on the scaffold. i think that the first thing to do is to make sure that this project moves forward and it will be as successful as possible. and also to support the idea that the just made, that you are giving up some of the affordability to get this project over the hurdle, it would make sense to give housing affordability first call in the half the case that things go better or fortunes change and things become possible. and try to claw our way back to the affordability that was envisioned in the project. it would be a shame to give up the transition. this project has to work on its own. it has to be attractive to the marketplace to succeed. see if you can't get the housing affordability back at some other

time and move this forward. president olague: public comment is closed. >> he wanted to cover a few other things. hopefully fairly quickly. we can have for the discussion on those. president olague: we will move to the next portion of the presentation if you wanted to continue on the legality. additional questions at this time for the city attorney? commissioner moore: i think there should be an explanation of what is going to be. >> i think she is prepared to do that if you want to spend a couple of minutes on that. >> i have the deputy city attorney. the city created it as a

california non-profit public benefit corporation and the articles of incorporation spell out the powers of the treasure island development authority, including a lot of oversight of the part of the city under the bylaws. the mayor appoints the board members with the board of supervisors and contracts of the treasure island development authority are subject to approval by the board of supervisors if the have a term of 10 years or worth $1 million or more. after it was created, it was determined that it would be more efficient to go forward with the project hope you had one entity that had both the powers of redevelopment and the trusty powers rather than having a project subject to the separate jurisdiction of both the port and the redevelopment agency. it gave the powers of the trust

he had provided that the board of supervisors had the power to designate a redevelopment agency, and does what the board of supervisors did. if it were to be under designated as a redevelopment agency, it would still continue as an instrumentality of the city. the loss would still apply and contracts would still be subject to the board of supervisors's approval. the charter would still apply and tida would remain as the trustee. as the presentation provided the land use authority that would have been invested, it would be

transferred to the city. commissioner miguel: am i correct that although it was granted the authority to be redevelopment and those powers, it never designated treasure island as a redevelopment area? the fact that is correct. >> had that happened, it would not be able to. commissioner sugaya: how much continued oversight is there with respect to the trust? >> it is similar to the port's role. they would need to make sure that the property was used and

there will be certain reporting requirements to the state commission. it is also contemplated that there will be an exchange agreement that was negotiated with the commission said there will be further involvement with state land and executing those exchanges. >> we can look favorably on the lt. gov.'s support. >> correct me if i'm wrong, redevelopment agencies had to show certain criteria to be able to be established or funded. one was the presence of light. the other was the provision of affordable housing, and the third was certain infrastructures to an area that did not have infrastructure before. there may be others. the question is, they do not have a requirement >> they do

not require that you make the bike findings. funds generated in the district can be used for infrastructure improvements outside of the district. >> they would need the consent of those residents in a particular district? gosh yes. >> i am from the office of economic work force development. we wanted to walk you through some of the other projects, many of which are refinements to the plans attached to the 2006 term sheet. the development agreement, the sustainability plan, the

agreement between the home initiative into the community facilities plan. first of the development agreement, which is separate from the disposition and development agreement that would be entered into. this is a contractual agreement between the developer and the city. it sets out the regulatory framework under which the project would be implemented and establishes a the fees and actions that would apply to the project over a 20-year time period. that is consistent with the relative documents and the attachment to that document. it works together. a couple of the key concepts, feature changes that conflict with the project approval would not apply to the project area.

however, the city can adopt regulations in order to protect physical health and safety as well as regulations that would allow the city and the agencies to comply with regulations to protect the environment. there are three sets of fees that would apply to the project. the waste water capacity charge and the hookup fees all would apply to the project area. new or increases would not apply after the first issuance of the building permits. any changes to the california standard or building code will also apply. as i mentioned, the development rights would be best through the development agreement. the city could not take any actions that would limit their ability to implement. there are also provisions that

acknowledge the roles and functions of the transportation management agency. and that all revenues would be collected by that agency and used for on-island transportation. and finally, it requires an annual review by the planning director of the developers compliance. before moving on to the sustainability plan -- commissioner sugaya: i will have a specific question right now. future changes exempting the project, in a similar provision, it said that that was limited to specific city actions or whatever that either targeted or in the neighborhood and around, i forget how it was worded. but that future city-wide

regulations would apply. i don't know if that is the case here. we don't have the development agreement before us. >> any regulations that would conflict with the redevelopment requirement or what we're calling the development requirements would not apply. >> this question has come up on another project, and i believe it is similar language. since she is coincidentally working on both projects. [laughter] >> counsel to the project sponsor, the development agreement tried to do what developing governments always do, to make provisions for the

change and things like building code and things like that. especially in a case like this where with respect to treasure island, there are a whole host of things that we provide like the transit subsidy that is part of the project and part of the back-and-forth that are outside of what you would find generally from city wide applicability. i don't have the agreement with me, so i will come back and answer the question specifically. that might be slight new ones that you're recalling. the way that the structure is conventional for development agreement, there are lots of other development agreements that the city has entered into where it is a 20-year term for that certainty. that is very conventional in

that regard. commissioner antonini: my question is is related to the same. with this development agreement, and if city-wide policies were to change in some aspect, the development agreement would prompt a change and they would not have to comply with these new -- i am just throwing out an inflationary policy that would be at odds with what was agreed upon. they would not be bound by the changes after word? >> a that is correct. >> there are two points you were making. you were saying that the city can't adopt future regulations to the health and safety of the public. if you have a change in

structural code, it will most likely apply. however, if you increase the green building performance that has more to do with regulation, it would not apply? >> that is an interesting point, what we are now saying and i will get to this and the sustainability presentation, all the buildings constructed on treasure island will meet the green building ordinance. to the extent that that continues to advance over the years, hollywood still be required to meet the green building ordinance. >> the latest version -- ok. >> on the sustainability plan, just to give a quick overview of the comprehensive plan, the approach that has gone into the

plan and summarizing some of the changes. it was conceived of back in 2006. to give you a quick overview of how the plan is put together, the underlying framework has ben integrated approach that starts with the land use compaq development centered around the intermodal transit hub. it is approximately 2/3 of the island. a large component is the green infrastructure approach and the creation of the storm water ru wetlands. as well as wildlife creation and the treatment as well. he will go to the unique grid orientation that will maximize exposure on the streets. the part [unintelligible]

much of what we are doing around sustainability is inherent in the land plan itself. they are committed to achieving cert. -- certification. we are about 7 points shy of achieving platinum, the highest level. all buildings will be required to comply. >it would be obligations of the horizontal developer who and subsequent to individual buildings.

starting back in 2005 with the department of the environment and various stakeholders to come up with those tax, we recently made the decision to move away from an island, a specific set of guidelines. and the project's approach has been recognized both nationally and internationally. have a program called the climate positive development program. the governor both recognized the project for its leadership and urban design. this is the analysis on the certification on behalf of ticd

showing the different categories of points. you can get there. some will be up to code. briefly, i think the changes in regulations and the technology as well as some of the project planning and due diligence, standards have changed at both the local and state level as was the policy. an action plan to get all commercial buildings and eventually residential buildings to net zero energy. we hope to get their through the life of the project. the ieeir includes variants that would help us to get towards those goals of neutrality as

well as the mitigation and monitoring plan to force all of the mitigation measures included in the eir. after the plan as a condition of approval for the final project. we also work with the department of the environment coming up with a habitat plan. it would be coming up with habitat management plans for each major phases of the parks. the design development contains the guidelines and standards. it also includes the green building specification that would be required of all developers. we have done a tremendous amount of due diligence ha working with the engineers on various components of the project. and also investigations into a different third parties and the ability to deliver certain pieces of the infrastructure.

we are looking at an automated waste collection system, we would make a decision prior to the first major phase as part of the horizontal infrastructure. the possibility of the heating and cooling plant, there is a tremendous amount of feasibility and analysis that has got in. moving on to the actual plan itself, is similar to the 2006 plan that focuses on individual resource areas. it really looks at the social component of the triple bottom line. we will talk about. and getting into the more concrete environmental aspects,

energy waste and water. [unintelligible] each chapter has up front, a system and ability at a glance table. the strategies to achieve the target and the metrics that are laid out, the benefits that are provided by reaching those targets. we will look briefly at energy. there is a requirement for demand with on-site renewable energy. there is a 15% improvement over the targets. this is primarily done through a

demand side reduction. to reduce energy demand. the and cooling, it is thermal. it will get us to the goals of reducing energy consumption. this looks long term at achieving carbon neutrality. we are working with the clinton foundation to establish an inventory of greenhouse gas emissions. it will generate on-site energy. all components of the plan would have it being used at peak

periods. it has been on the radar since 2006. it will identify the island and to reinforce the island. there is a project recommendation. with that, i will turn that over. >> these slides i will go

through pretty quickly. i will focus on tsunami generation. in light of the events that took place a couple weeks ago. here are a few graphics on house tsunamis are generated. these are some very nice cartoons from a very technical source, wikipedia. there are some very nice graphics that shows how a tsunami is generated. it is basically one of the plates that is writing another --riding under another plate. it continues, pressure builds up, certain places along

northern california actually show a negative sea level rise. pressure builds up over time, and once it reaches a certain point, there is vertical displacement. on the right, it has the most significant [unintelligible] it was a nine plus magnitude earthquake. that is one where they had a lot of damage. it is critical to understand