Commission. President matsuda here. Commission Vice President warren here. Commissioner baldauf here. Commissioner campbell here. Commissioner foley, present. Commissioner vergara here. And commissioner right here. Thank you. Commissioners, first on your agenda is general Public Comment at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission, except agenda items with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. Each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes. Again if you are. If you wish to speak under general Public Comment, please come forward. Last call. Seeing none, general. Good afternoon. I just preserve everything. Dont touch anything. Historic things. Because its very important for whats coming in the future. Are we going . Sorry. Are we going to change . Basical
as there may be some temporary inconvenience at times, and we do recognize that. the national park service does monitor access, and the code is restricted to non motorized vehicles the code cove is restricted. some could not be done under project levels. the eir does analyze long-term development and the conceptual level, not at a project-specific level, and it provides a broad sweep of mitigation levels. the analysis is insufficient detail to support the discretionary as envisioned in the host and then you and venue agreement. the analysis will be required for all development projects, whether they be eir or other. and we do not know what kind of an apartment to a document that would be until we know what the project would be. spectator boats, eir does not support a reduced number of spectator boats. the draft eir numbers for the spectator boats were based on preliminary informal estimates from race organizers but not on actual counts. we do have people here who coul
the dolphins and south and rowing club. the south end rowing club. i will not go through each and every one of them, but i will touch on a few that came up during testimony. aquatics park, the issue that the appellants raised is insufficient analysis of the impacts of the jumbotron in a aquatic park. there is concern about increased boat traffic in an aquatic park and the safety to swimmers in the cove. the staff has analyzed impacts on water quality, air quality, nor is, hazards, and recreation, and they are all covered in the eir air quality, nor is, hazards, and recreation. air quality, noise. sediment due to the type of moorings and the flashing in the cove, the use of fuel for generators must comply with requirements for secondary containment and spill prevention. the generators would only be used during events, and air pollution emissions would be reduced but the use of biofuels as there may be some temporary inconvenience at times, and we do recognize that. the
the mitigation measures provided by the air district, we did provide extensive updated mitigation measures. the one at pier 70 b is addressed 70 is addressed. we had to be conservative. and could point to bring up in the air district as they did it request and in lieu of feet. their letters as they did accept been the pier 70 instead of the in lieu fees. the air quality emissions. we did revise the air quality analysis based on the description assumptions or spectator and support boats, cruise ships, updated air district methodology, and updated and augmented mitigation measures considerably. as i said before. and the revised analysis more accurately addresses the impact. another issue, the mitigation measures is it feasible, so the impact should be less than significant. the operational air quality impact, the impact remains a significant and unavoidable. the eir does not quantify or provided description. the final eir includes a description of direct impact, such as d