leadership. in fact, we are strongly opposed to some of the negative effects on the community. fundamentally i do not believe they should be speaking or dealing with anything outside the boundaries of telegraph hill. i think the project, the treasure island project as originally designed, the unat rated version is going to provide a very beautiful view from san francisco and the east bay. thank you. >> good evening commissioners and directors. you can mark me down as being neutral on the e.i.r. i have my doubts about some of the transportation ideas. did i say my name 123467 jamie whittaker. i live in the rincon hill area. you may have noticed out of 700

folks, 32 children live in that building. the traffic issue is the big one for me. it is the big concern. walking up to market street to catch a metro train to this hearing, i observed a mother walking her stroller across harrison street at main street legally and a car lurged around from main street and laid on the horn and was honking at this mother walking her baby stroller across the street. we have a horrible traffic congestion problem right now. and i hope that we're right that we can set a congestion charge on the island so that the noolings have the one vehicle -- folks that have the one vehicle per one unit choose public transits but i'm doubtful.

in my neighborhood, the rincon area plan has a one parking space for every two units unless there is some mechanical parking. some buildings have a valet because they are built for fwolings lots of money and they can afford to pay for those services to go get their car. in my building, ookt half of the 288 units -- about half of the 288 residentses do not own cars. they walk. i want to put on the overhead why it is so important that folks use public transit. there is a lot of folks that get hurt in district 6 and we can't afford to lose for -- thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. good evening, commissioners. my name is karen knolls pierce. i'm the chair of the citizens

advisory board since it has been in existence for over a decade. during that time, we have had hundred dollars of meetings, i don't -- hundreds of meetings. i don't actually know the number. we have met at the tihdi board. we have met in subcommittees, on tuesdays, on wednesday, on thursdays, on saturdays. we have held meetings on the island at city hall, at the court, at the library and we have had numerous public meetings with opportunities for the public to express their opinion. we have a board of very involved and educated and challenging members who have discussed every element of the e.i.r. and we --

i know that the response time was extended for the public to give additional comments on this. so after a decade, everything has been vetted quite substantially. our cab met on tuesday where we voted to -- or we took action on recommendation to approve all of the transaction and entitlement documents of the 24 members of our board, 21 were present and the vote was 20-1. so it was overwhelmingly in support of the plan and the e.i.r. and i hardly encourage you -- hartey encourage you to certify -- heartily encourage you to support the e.i.r. thank you very much.

>> my name is jennifer clary. i'm president of san francisco tomorrow. i'm passing out our very short comments now i'm doing short comments because i tried very hard to read the very long comments. i want to thank staff very, very much for incident to everything they could to make the comments successable. do you know that the attachment for this item was 200 megabytes. my computer crashed several times. staff kindly resent the documents but i still had a 400 page attachment with no table of contents. it would be nice if we could have something a little more user friendly. i made my own table of contents and i'm not sure i got everything. i understand there was supposed to be a document that i did not

see in the document. i'm not sure i got everything. anyway, to make a long story short, we really were looking forward to this proposal. we had some really great designs, especially about five years ago for a really sustainable development and i don't know if it is because of -- it is because of the, you know, master developer concept is just wrong or if it really wasn't feasible, but the fact of the matter was the sustainability of this project has eroded steadily over time and what we have now is a standard developer-driven auto-driven development that is just going to make traffic worse in an already constrained area and it is going to take reducing affordability and the people who live there, the low-income people who live there are going to be penalized because of a very poor, almost non-existent transit program that is poorly planned and poorly funded.

unfortunately san francisco tomorrow cannot support the current environmental impact document nor the treasure island proposal. thank you. >> good evening. my name is judy irving and i'm an independent documentary filmmaker. i work with pelican media. i would like to speak for the birds. i would like to mention that the e.i.r. did not adequately provide for mitigation for the very tall buildings that are going to be built right in the middle of the bay. this is in the pacific flyway and the concerns of the sierra club and the a you had bonn society have not -- audobon

authority. just as a way to step back from this a little bit, this is a huge project with very tall buildings built on an island that is essentially landfill. we are in an active earthquake zone. we have climate change. we have sea level rise. we have tsunami problems. we have seen all of this in great detail in jab in the last few weeks. and i think that with this 20-year buildout that you're talking about, i hope that you're not going to be sorry that you certified this e.i.r. because there are warning signs and there are people who are warning you that this is not a smart development. it has also expanded radically from the way it was first proposed.

i just think that we should try think ahead to what might happen and what could happen on that island to the people living there, stuck there in the case of a really bad earthquake and tsunami. thank you very much. >> commissioners in, good evening, saul bloom, archaeology. it is no longer adequate to effectively represent the project. i support the comments of my colleagues from telegraph hill, sierra club and others. it has been the work for the benefit of san francisco since 1991. i was a member in 1949 and 1995

we -- 1994 and 1995 we sued the navy to kick start the cleanup. in 1996, we started despite our concerns about ferry and transit. the problem for me is that the balance struck by the prior project has been undone by the new units of housing. nothing in the comments and responses gives me comfort that our concerns have been understood and that recent changes to the plans in response to governor's efforts that we find very discomforting. anyone who sat in traffic who has ever sat in traffic for two hours to pay and arm and a leg to cross the george washington bridge or the lincoln tunnel knows that when incentives for driving are there, people will pay the price. saying that what is overstated, the impact to the project and

the e.i.r., it is barely adequately posted in the april 21 memo. the adjustments to the plan have changed. the project of the point of requiring circulation, we should not shrink from measuring twice to cut once. in the long run, it will be the shortest route to a sustainable project. thank you very much. have a good evening. >> president olague. president cheng. my name is aaron peskin. let me see if in 1:43 i can cram at least 15 years of history into the next 1:46 seconds. let me fast forward to 2003 when the department of the navy issued an environmental impact

statement for 2840 dwelling units for 6895 people on treasure island in the year 2003. the record of decision on that e.i.s. was that the impacts to transportation biling, at thetics, air quality and noise would be --s a thetics, air quality and noise. we need to build a more dense development and indeed as a member of the board of supervisors, as the president of that body in the year 2006, that body voted unanimously to balance a number of public interests with 6,000 units. in 2010, the mayor's office average and tihdi decided to raise that to 8,000 units. the impacts to traffic are phenomenal to the east bay. you'll see 42 unavoidable

significant, unmitigateable impacts in the e.i.r. that is before you and that was before the world changed again and governor brown brought the whole concept of redevelopment financing into question and the public benefits to affordable house wrg reduced to 25% but that is a 17% reduction. the impacts have been increasing. and the public benefits have been eroding and the e.i.r. you have gotting and i have seen as of april 12, 41 pageses and it was brought to my attention yesterday, 96 pages in additional changes. i do not want to ask how many of you commissioners have read those documents but let me say it was not possible for me to read them. it is unlikely that you have read them. i cannot believe that you know what you're voting on. >> thank you. >> madam president. thank you. >> thank you.

>> is there any additional public comments? >> hello, commissioners. my name is vince courtney. 261 in san francisco. we have 3,000 men and women who need work. i'm here today to speak favor of this project. we understand that sometimes things change a little bit but the men and women that rely on us and rely on you to make the decisions that need to be made wanted me to come here and tell they need these job opportunities. they need to pay their rent. they need to pay their mortgage. they need to pay for their cars and they need you guys to make difficult decisions and make sure that the treasure island project happens. please do the right thing. don't politicize this issue and move this project forward for san francisco. thank you.

>> thank you. is there any additional public comment on the e.i.r.? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners? madam president. before we go to the commission, we need to call the item into the record. so if you would just indulge me for a moment. >> please. commissioners you are calling item number one and two. you are now at consideration of finding some final action. the public hearing for this category is closed. you're considering item one case 2007 point 09 e. you're considering certification of the environmental impact report.

>> commissioner antonini? getting ahead of >> thank you. good evening, president olague and cheng and members of the commission and board. i'm rick cooper from the environmental planning section of the planning department and also with me are victoria wise who provides analysis for the e.i.r. and andrea of the planning staff. the item before you is certificate figureation of the final rory for the development project. the proposed project would include development on treasure island and nearby buena island of up to 1,000 residential units. commercial and retail space. up to 100,000 square feet of new

office space. up to 311,000 square feet of commercial and retail space and 500 hotel rooms. new and or upgraded public and community facilities, a new combined police and fire station on treasure island. new and/or upgraded public utilities. cultural uses such as a museum. new and upgraded streets. bicycle transit and pedestrian facilities. waterside facilities. land site services for an expanded marina. a transit hub. the project would also include several infrastructure improvements including

geotechnical stabilization to improve seismic safety. the proposed project woled include specifications, programs to encourage transit use, design standards for panels on most roofs, recycle water use and most features promoting sustainability. the copy of the draft is before you. the draft rory was published on july 12, -- e.i.r. was published on july 12, 2010. public hearing closed in 2010. it was distributed on march 10, 2011. today we also provide you with it that has earlier testimony available on the rack in the back that has provisions to correct minor errors on the

e.i.r. copies of the memo are also available. you have also received a memorandum data which describes certain changes which occurred following publication of the comments and responses including a change in the government's structure and documents under which it would be implemented. designed for development that have occurred since the march 5 2010 draft was circulated. this was sent to all interested parties and was made available on the planning commission websites. it is being replaced with a new proposed treasure island buena island area plan to be added to the san francisco general plan, which would no longer simply

reference the plan but instead present policies to provide the foundation for land use and development and the special use district to be added to the planning code along with zoning amendments. the references designed for development and uses its standards and guidelines as a basis. the main financing mechanism also has been revised under redevelopment plans to one or more infrastructure district mechanisms. as a direct result it would change from 2400 units discussed in the e.i.r. to. 2,000 units. it is envisioned to an area plan from a redevelopment plan. some are in response to public

comments on march 5 public review draft. the maximum height limits and maximum parking ratios for commercial uses have also been reduced. as described in the memo, none of these present any new information that would alter the conclusions presented in the draft e.i.r. consequently they do not trigger the need purr suents to ceqa. also you have been presenteded with a copy of the letter. none of these letters raise new environmental issues that have not already been addressed through drafert e.i.r. at this time i would like to address some issues that have been raised recently and in today's hearing. one issue was raised recently by a fire marshal regarding the proposed street layout, specifically with regard to public safety and emergency

response. in march 2009, a comprehensive street network and grid design drawing was presented to the transportation advisory staff committee or tasc for the fire department, the police department, city planning and m.t.a. and traffic engineering. the members were satisfied that the project adequately addressed their concerns. last week the mayor's office of economic and workforce development staff met with the fire chief and her staff including fire marshal barbara. based on that meeting, the fire chief stated that she is satisfied that the angles of the

streets meet all the requirements of the fire department for access and the proposed street grid does not violate any requirements. as the plan moves into the next phase of design, all layouts and intersection configurations will be subject to review and approval by the fire department and other applicable city agencies including m.t.a. and the mayor's office of disability. in order to be approved it will have to be found to be conformant to the fire code and all applicable regulations including site distance. they have confirmed in a memo dated april 19, 2011, that the proposal is not in conflict with the better streets plan. the fire department's deputy chief of operations, patrick gardner is here this evening to answer any questions you may

have on this issue. also during public comment portion over the meeting, we heard speakers who raised other issues concerning the project. many of the comments did not address environmental issues but rather were expressions of the opposition to the project. public opinion regarding the merits of the project is not a topic of concern for the certification of the e.i.r. although you may wish to take such comments into account during your consideration of the project entitlement. some of the comments raised did address some environmental issues. i would like to reference to cal transletter we referred to earlier. dated april 20, yesterday. and this letter generally expresses support for e.i.r. and

basically looks forward to further consultation with the city. thank you. >> further consultation with the city in those regards. there were a couple of minor issues. one regarding requesting signage on the island to indicate to motorists that they may need to wait for a while to get on to the bridge. other than that, this letter is not in my view, does not express any new issues that we have not already dealt with in the e.i.r. regarding the effects of tsunamis, both the commission and the board have received briefings in previous hearings on this issue and the e.i.r. analysis properly concluded that the level of flood protection is adequate to protect against all flood hazards including tsunami.

regarding hazardous materials on the island, there was an issue raised regarding potentially new sites where radiation may occur. there is, as described in the e.i.r., there is an extensive regulatory framework in place that would provide for remediation of sites if new materials are discovered. we have also provided mitigation measures in the e.i.r. that bolster that program so that any materials that are found would be dealt with propetsly. -- appropriately. if you'll refer to the mitigation measure in the document, there is an extensive measure that requires consultation with a wildlife biologist as to when buildings are proposed and also allows for

changes in the way that bird strikes with dealt with over time as the technology and understanding of bird strikes evolves and we believe this measure is very robust and would reduce the impact to a level that is less than significant. the evaluation of issues in the e.i.r., the implementation of the project would result in unavoidable environmental immacts that could not be mitigated to a significant level in transportation, noise, air quality, wind and biological resources. in conclusion, we suggest it is accurate and adequate and the procedure for it, the final e.i.r. complies with the ceqa, the ceqa findings.

this concludes my presentation. at this time, i would like to introduce michael, presenting our co-lead agency, the treasure island development authority, following michael's presentation, our team can respond to any questions that the commission or board members may have. thank you. >> the treasure island development authority board of directors. item three. public hearing closed. 3 a resolution certifying the report, the treasure island, buena island project. good evening presidents olague and cheng, commissioners in and directors. as rick mentioned, the item before you is a resolution to certify the final environmental impact report for the treasure island, buena island development

project by adopting this resolution, you will be certifying that the final e.i.r. is accurate and adequate and that the procedures by which it was prepared are consistent with the ceqa guidelines and the city's code. i defer my remarks to rick cooper to and staff is here to answer any questions that you may have or address any of the issues that were raised earlier during public comment. >> thank you. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i agree that it is quat and consistent. i would like to answer -- is adequate and consistent. i think mr. cooper spoke to a lot of those but comments were made to the effect that you know, a lot of this is landfill as is most of downtown san francisco, which did quite well in the earthquake of 1989. i think it is not the