the infrastructure. this will happen in an incremental manner, and it is contained in a couple of parts. we will accommodate up to 36 inches of sea level rise plus an additional 6 inches. we will also be elevating and retrofiting the entire perimeter of the island to account for sea level rise up to 16 inches. this is important because it balances the mandates to maximize public access to the shore line and providing our reasonable level of flood protection. as i mentioned, the development area is anywhere from 200 pager 350 feet, -- 200 pager 350 feet.

the final -- 200 to 350 feet. the final is to fund the capital as well as maintenance costs, so all of these will be delivered at no cost to the puc or at no cost to the general funds or tax base. a sea level rise up to 16 inches. the storm drainage system will remain trained. once we get to 16 inches, the shoreline will be raised to prevent a problem. and now they will be maintained. above 36 inches, the entire shoreline a dish and will act as a levy. i mentioned the development said

iraq's -- said bias -- setbacks, and the final plan includes a mechanism to create a steady stream of funding dedicated to the strategies and operating expenses. the additional improvements are about $7 million to get to stage one, to provide improvements that would protect of to 36 inches of steel level rise. -- up to 36 inches of sea level rise. improvements equal $38.2 million. we have done some analysis to look at what if you were to raise the grave today to protect against 55 inches of sea level

in ras -- to raise the grade o today to protect against 55 inches of sea level rise. also to raise the entire perimeter 55 inches raises a number of urban design issues and issues related to the existing school. you would have retaining walls along the campus, and drainage issues associated with that, and walls of for to 5 feet. >> the initial improvements for 7 million -- worth 7 million. if you then make improvements, is that $29 million?

>> 29. but >> and then an additional 38? >> going from 55 would be an additional 8.8, so to get us from what is provided initially totals 35.2 million. the initial is the cost associated with the perimeter improvement. they do not include raising the grade at development areas. >> if you were to do it now? >> approximately 73 million, so about double period -- about double.] >> we will come back to that. >> before turning it over, i

want to highlight a recent report that came out the addresses climate change. it includes climate across six sectors, transportation, ecosystems, energy, water management, and sea level rises. agaithe report includes a recommended a series of actions, and i want to walk through each of these with you in a little bit of detail and talk about how of a project complies with each recommended action, so the first one looks at planning departments to undertake a short-term risk assessment and that those should include a range of sea level rise projections for the middle and end of the century, and that they should be prepared and

updated every five years. we have done just that. we have looked in the ninth presented. and we have undertaken a coastal flooding report ourselves, and the requirement to update every five years is consistent with these provisions. do not know permit new herriot's identified by local risk assessment as -- new areas identified by local risk assessment of the vulnerable unless certain criteria are met. those three criteria the project complies with our natural resources restoration project, underutilized land within an existing urbanized area served by transit or within the existing priority development

areas. it will be served are robust transit and bus service to the issei as well as san francisco common and -- to the east side as well as san francisco, and finally through design and financial strategies. we do both. the next one is to develop fee level rise flood protection plans, utilize local risk assessment and innovation map to plan for sea level rise and include those in the safety element position and non- structural methods should be used. we have done this starting with the report, and as detailed in infrastructure plan, developed

plans for initial improvement as well as long-term implementation strategy. we also comply with this, requirement that public access to the long term. this should require it to remain viable through elevated pathways, and we will show you thsome of the sections of how about access will be maintained. -- some assessment of how the access would be maintained. finally, that would be updated with new regulatory agencies and no less than every five years, and in terms of some of their

strategies that are recommended to address or mitigate future sea level rise. coastal armory -- we are doing that through improvements of the sea wall, elevated and development by raising the sea wall 36 inches, and finally, the living shoreline's or wetlands. you will walk through in detail the northern shoreline and how it could actually accommodate new wetlands in the future to accomplish this objective. >> can i ask you a question about the wetlands? there are three sets of what land already, but an official and one for climate change issues -- an additional one for climate change issues. we would have to reassess its, right? >> you would essentially be

moving the armored sea wall back, and it could wrap around the existing facility. they will be required to deliver an elevated pad consistent with the elevations, so you will get a pad at 36 inches above the current level. >> the siting would be done jointly? >> we will work together. it is subject to this future agreement. if they decided to construct a new facility on site, it could be done in a number of ways. it could be replaced entirely. if it was replaced, it would likely be adjacent to the side. before i turn it over, the sustainable above and policy director was here earlier of your your -- here earlier.

i want to read a letter on this sea level rising of approach. finally, the new perimeter rock wall designed to protect new treasure island from c level rise is innovative. the only certainty is that it will increase in the future. it is prudent to use adaptive designs that can be modified according to future conditions. treasury island ' is smart, because it allows us to fill treasure island ' is smart, because it allows us to -- treasure island's idea is smart, because it allows us to build higher in the future. and i will turn it over to walk you through the sea level rise and tsunami risk level we have

done and finally, todd adaire will talk about the existing and proposed rates relative to facilities. good >> when you said revenue- neutral, what did you mean? >> the project is financed through a project-generated revenues. >> that is how you offset the revenue neutral? >> and then a community facility bonds. >> of 55 inches will be taken care of by 21 -- this will be taken care of by 2110? >> based on the guidance we have received, that is what they are projecting by the end of the century. the improvement would likely

take place before the end. >> how long have you been working on this project? >> for years. >> well done. >> who is going to be paying for this? >> the city is authorized to issue those bonds. those are paid for by reassessments with property owners on treasure island. >> don't you think is the level is going up the property levels might be going down? >> not here. we are better off than many a low-level areas throughout.

>> you do not think the property values will go down if the water starts laughing at -- lapping at that mark, >> if we are successful, we will make those improvements are to water spilling over the edge -- prior to water spilling over the edge. >> does that mean if you own property you will get an additional tax? >> that is correct there is an assessment on top of the tax rate. once those bonds are retired, the seguin can pay for these improvements triggered --

improvements. they are backed by property owners. >> i have a question. it talks about when the sea wall was constructed. something could be put upon it. is that going to be done? >> there is probably of mixing of terminology. and along the marina and the input, we are more constrained, so you would

see an actual seawall similar to what you would see a long the embarcadero, so the similarity it would be raised. what we are talking about is an elevated area there, and we will show you how that can bee widend to provide public access along the water's edge. >> it was not decided to do a taller barrier, because that would be bad. then they talk about a monitoring program. is that going to be incorporated herrmann -- inc.?

>> one requirement is that they do a program that looks of the existing record that makes recommendations for improvements over subsequent five years and the funds necessary to make those improvements. >> the final question i had, and i must add that my mother was there, and we were flying airplanes to china during your -- to china. what about the traffic of, how are we going to manage that -- what about the traffic? how are we going to manage that? >> we have a number of tools in place.

they would be charged a fee for driving onto the bridge. ultimately, they will meet her common-law -- meter it, so they will control coming and not on and off of the bridge. youit will access as a stand-ale entity steve. and will have at its disposal of subsidy to pay for transit, which includes the ferry to san francisco as well as a shuttle and transit to oakland. i mentioned the resident transit

maps. each household will be required to buy a pass. we're not trying to prevent some from buying cars. all of the congestion pricing revenues, commercial parking fees will go back to that agency to be disbursed to trump the providers -- to transit providers, so we are trying to encourage people to get out of their cars. >> i have a question, and why don't we start with a disclaimer hamas -- a disclaimer herrmann -- a disclaimer?

let's go back to the prices of three in the sea walls to various levels. -- bring in the sea walls to various levels. 29 to take it from 16 tase 36o . 8 to bring it to 65. at some point don't they become jurisdiction will to somebody? our guess i believe that is when they could answer this. -- >> i believe that is when

they could enter this. >> that would be the 36 inch level. >> i believe that is correct. >> maciel levels are higher than today's levels. -- the sea levels are higher than today's levels. >> who has jurisdiction over those levees? >> those are certified by fema. the city would certify the levees but will be dealt -- built. >> they would be fema-designated sections for developmened areas? >> that is correct they would have maps showing treasure

island as a lovey-protected community. -- levee-protected community. >> those levees are going to be different structures then what you have now, and it is surprising that the estimate is only $35.8 million. >> we have a few sections here and it showed the levels are not what you typically see in the delta of. there will be an additional structure in iraq of the existing perimeter -- in back of

the existing perimeter. >> has that design and cost estimate been reviewed? i know of the soil stabilization work was reviewed, but as far as estimating the cost, is about third-party reviewed? >> they have concurred that based on the level of design and engineering we know today, these are reasonable estimates. >> that included costs? >> correct. you>> it is really hard to believe, and i am not saying anything that is not in your

record, but it is hard to believe that. you said the total would be $38.2 million. the numbers do not add up. >> the sum total to get us from what is existing -- the initial up to 16 inches is what is provided as part of the infrastructure development, also 29.4 million to get us to 36 and 8.8 to get us up to 55. the grand total would be 45, and that does not take into account geotechnical stabilization. >> if you do it now, why is it so much more expensive? >> the strategy is different.

the number i gave you would be into elevates it to 55 inches. and there are challenges in terms of technical feasibility. you would not be protecting the existing school facility, so the perimeter is are actually more complete. >> sadat was to build had higher and not the wall higher? >> as far as financing, the mechanism is the facilities district, and there is a cap of

2 percent cited, -- 2%, and how much those that generate beaumont regenerate? >> that is the correct tax rate that would go to a number of things. the other one would be for property taxes. >> the first one and a half is for the general tax rate. the other is used to bond against it. the assessed value is

approximately $4.2 billion. you would generate in one year $37 million. you would have retired some of the bonds, so if you only have 50%, you could collect $17.8 million per year. >> forgive me if i am slow, but it is the problem of dealing with this of the late state. -- at this late date. 9.85 is the tax rates? >> that is correct. >> it translates to how many dollars? >> the average value is $750,000

for a total of $4.2 billion. but now it's you 35 ports $7 billion on an annual -- $354 7 million on an annual basis. >> is there a budget for how that 20 allocated -- how that would be allocated? >> it would be allocated to pay the initial improvement for all of the infrastructure. . there would be of process that

would include a cost estimate of peace improvements in -- of these improvements. after that they would make decisions about ongoing and parks and open space. we have not estimated that, but the first call is sea level improvement. >> who is making the decision on that? today exist in perpetuity -- do they exist in perpetuity? >> they are a city agency. they could at some point now designates to another authority.