produces, and a sea of $9 million -- some have suggested that is a mere bagatelle. i do not think so. i think that is fuzzy math. i talked to doug shoemaker earlier this week. if you run that arithmetic, it assumes you have taken $9 million as a grants on the housing. that is crazy. all housing deals, whether they are 4%, or 9%, are leveraged. we are clear to go with the north beach project, the north beach. the city put in $10 million. that is $48 million worth of equity.

we actually spent $300,000 per unit, but the city only put in $10 million. why is it we get only 29 units of $9 million. something is wrong. i suggest there is a positive -- there is an unspoken asset here. i also suggested if you want to get a harbinger of future quality, look at pier 1 and pier 3 and 5. they are first rate. >> my name is gina marie. -- good afternoon, commissioners. my name is june marie. i have lived in at san francisco for 47 years. i am a bit nervous. i am not used to doing this. there are always going to be

people who will go against some things peeping but being a hiker, and i walked in the embarcadero all the time. is very good for my health. i walked there and i am able to study all the areas, and i think it would be wonderful if we had the 8 washington project approved. it will be very good for the city and for many other people who spend time in that area. it will be good for the children. we will finally have children in the playground. there will be so many things. it is just a dirty eyesore. i have seen young people drinking in cars there. is time for change. we need to go forward, not backward. sometimes we can go forward, but you have to. must do it. then we will see progress. thank you very much for your

time. >> at this time, there are seats available in this room. if you're listening to this, watching this in the overflow room, if you want to come up to him to 50, please do so. -- come up to room 250, please do so. >> commissioners, good afternoon. the northeast waterfront -- its beauty and grace is an unmatched. for several generations, there has been a consensus on the nature and type of development on the northern embarcadero. today, that consensus is being challenged by supporters in city hall who have a sensibility about the fragile and unique nature of the northeast waterfront. they seek new development along

the northern embarcadero. in the column "san francisco," -- "ever tumor i give my duty, first in rapture, first in ud, glad of the light god gave, cleanly and strongly she is my cool grey city of love." thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is sarah and i am it proud to stand before you today in support of the 8 washington project. we believe this development is a

significant improvement on a key intersection of the city's no. waterfront. this project is, as you heard earlier, of the city wide importance. many people testified the embarcadero is a tool. is -- a jewel. the 8 washington project proposes to provide publicly- accessible open space, housing, renovated clubs, and underground parking. not surface parking, but undergrad. we are pleased with the design of the project, which includes the addition of green roofs to the project and playground area. we support the current project, which we believe are perfect for the area. the project sponsor has made adjustments to the design and

scale of the building, protecting surrounding buildings. the scale of this project is modest inappropriate. it is important to note the project's location. it is enclosed proximity to many transit lines like bart, muni, ferry lines. it is unlikely that residence -- it is likely that residents will be encouraged to walk, take transit, and make use of sustainable transportation modes. we are impressed with the public access part of the project. and we appreciate the effort to reconnect the city streets to the waterfront. i would also like to mention, i am a resident of north beach as well, and i often walk along the

embarcadero on my way to the ferry building. those of you who have done so will note the western side of the embarcadero is problematic in a variety of ways. many of the sea wall lots are surface parking lots, and it is our real shame to see the gap in the western side of the embarcadero. i believe this project will greatly add to the pedestrian experience on the western side of the embarcadero, and i would urge you to move it forward. thank you very much. >> michael mckenna, louise ray. >> i am here on behalf of my brothers and sisters at local one of six and all the other sisters and brothers in the trade.

i have only heard from people today and not wanting to lose their racquet club. i think it is time we move forward. i think this project will do more for the city them bad for all the people involved. please pass this so we can move on. i would like to interject, the jobs it will create, not only from this project, but from the redevelopment, that money can be used to create jobs also. let's look into the future. pass this thing so we can move on. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is mike mckenna. i represent the 2600 workers of electrical local 6. i am a sixth generation san franciscan who lives and raised his children here in san francisco. the purpose of this hearing is to pass the eir report.

i apologize to the parks and recreation commission people who have not heard much talk about the shallows through the park, which is there -- their portion of it, although it is a very minimal shadow cast from all the reports i have heard. i will miss the fact that i can easily park on hickey walk because it is a ghost town. when i go downtown, i drive right to that spot where the tennis club is, because i know there's a spot available to me almost every time of the day, because that area is not used at all. the environmental impact of that is right now is far worse than any impact that is going to come from this fabulous development that will create jobs.

the stranglehold that is held on all these projects that come before you through every single step of the way -- e.r. are -- eir , planning commission, board of supervisors, that hold up the job for years and years and years, that keeps workers from working, keeps revenue from being built, it is just devastating. that these projects can be held for so long until they become economically unviable or until developers throw up their hands and say, you know, is that worth it to me to go through all of this, the hearings, the court proceedings, the supervisors. is just incomprehensible that this could happen -- it is just incomprehensible that this could happen. that they could get anything to the city and be locked up. i encourage you to approve the eir for this project, move

forward to the next stage where we have to wait and see if we can get through that, until this project can be built. i hope, on behalf of myself and all other members, that we can get these things build and get to work. thank you. >> [reading names] >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is john wang, a member of local 6. i agree with what mike just said. on top of bringing revenues to the city and creating jobs that are much needed for our members, also i wish one day i can bring my two little children to come to the park and be able to play. you know, in the open space that

is much needed in the area. is about time to replace this eyesore -- it is about time to replace this eyesore with a beautiful building. i urge you to certify this er and move forward with this project. -- certify this er and move forward with this project. thank you. >> i appreciate all the commissioners giving me a couple of minutes to speak at this point. my name is adam bergman. i live in this area. probably closer than anyone who was spoken today. i live at 500 davis street and to my unit faces of of davis. as a residence -- as are residents, i am here to voice my opposition. this is my first time coming to any of these meetings. really what has come to me as the main reason to voice my opposition is i have a 3-year-

old son and a second child who is two-month old, and while i did not bring my 3-year-old here as a prop like someone else did to speak, i am uncomfortable with having multiple years of construction and the environmental impact to my family and everyone else in that neighborhood, as well as what the implications are of having 400 cars in team onto the street is going to do. i am a big supporter of open space. i am not a member of the tennis club. to be honest, i really do not care what happens to it. if they want to tear it down and use it for green space, i think it would be a wonderful thing. i would be a huge supporter of that. i am talking, what are the implications for someone who lives here? i am someone who lives in the

city who wants to send my children to public school. if this comes up here, you can watch me leave. there are a lot of people in this community as well. you will see them leave. i moved to this area because it was quiet, because there was not a lot of traffic and it was a nice neighborhood, and if you put 400 cars in there, at on the emporium, the america's cup, this is not going to be a nice place to live. it is great you are going to put 150 units in there for people who make multiple millions of dollars, but they do not have kids. you will watch your city get older and get childless and it will be a tough place to continue. i am not against development. i am for development. if they want to develop this site and put zero parking spots on it, i am all for it. i have an issue with the parking spots. i have an issue with the new traffic.

@ think you need to look at -- i think you need to take a look. it is great everyone is giving their views on the neighborhood. at the end, i am the person living there who does not leave the ferry building to go back,. >> >> good afternoon, commissioners. i live in north beach. i have been in the same rent- controlled apartment for 47 years. before that, i had two other addresses. it appears it is necessary to validate oneself before speaking with you. i am a retired city employee. i was middle management in the

welfare department and educated in the bay area as well. this is the developers against the residents. this always ends up before the board of supervisors. those that have appointed you are those that are pulling the strings. i have made many speeches before both of these commissions, especially the planning commission. the votes are getting closer together on the planning commission. it seems that it is always 4-3 against the residence and for the developers. you are here to decide and whether the eir is adequate or not. it is not. it has defects. it does not consider the cumulative impact. commissioner miguel spotted that a long time ago.

this would be, if you approve this, you are signalling to the developers them that they are still in charge. this is a movement that has been going on. this has to do with to is appointing new commissioners. i do hope that you will consider the cumulative impact of this and it should be addressed and it is your duty to notice and decline this project at this time. the only people this project would really benefit is construction workers.

many people did not understand what is at stake. i don't think any of you have been appointed to keep construction workers' jobs. it is much broader than that it is us residents. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. the comment has been made that the waterfront is for all of san francisco and indeed the world and i agree wholeheartedly with that comment. under that standard, i come to the conclusion that those who say that it is a deficiencct eir are correct. the height limit increase that is being requested is one thing, but what is clearly been understated is the huge mass of mess, the vault and massive ness

of this project. part of it will be higher than the embarcadero freeway was when it was up. the wit of this project is as wide as a football field. the comment had been made by others earlier that this project sets a precedent for the future. the eir says there is nothing pending nearby. that is just flat out wrong. many of the same entities that are involved with this are also involved with a pending project which is before the planning commission that would tear down 75 howard, replace all of that with a residential tower. that would be a precedent. along the waterfront, you will have a cumulative impact of not

only a massive project at 8 washington but also a proposed project at 75 howard. you move on a little bit, you have a restaurant that will be moved again at the corner of broadway and the embarcadero. all of which will impact the ferry building which is an icon and critically important as well as the exploratory of which it be a good project for the city coming forward. we can and should do better. this project sets a precedent and it will have a profound impact and we need to recognize that. i don't think that the eir does. i would like to comment on one point that was raised with regard to public trust, very quickly. the eir is flawed. it does not point out that the

state lands commission in order to approve this what must find that sea wall lot 351 is "relatively useless." that finding cannot be made. the public resourced code cannot be met and i will ask that my remarks on that be included in the record. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am here to speak against this eir not only for myself but for my late father. as a founding member of the telegraph hill trawlers, he spent 40 years to protect the

scale of the waterfront. my father along with many other concerns san franciscans pushed for the height limit which still stands today. he said he did not want san francisco to become like manhattan. the developer is requesting that the planning commission vote to urge that the board of supervisors approved and out the zoning in height limits from 84 feet up to 136 feet. my father worked hard for the benefit of everyone, not just for high and developers are those that can afford their creations. they do.

and -- thank you. >> i am a rushing hill resident. -- a russian hill resident. this is an integral part of the area. i'm excited that this includes 8 center that will serve us. the majority of members are swimmers not tennis players. furthermore, the configuration of the current club has used -- has blocked off other areas. this is not only for paying members. they will provide several service for the neighborhood. i understand that the club currently has 2000 members and that would maintain roughly 2000

members in the new form. the waterfront has become a highly public and vibrant place and each side of the embarcadero. >> this has been a tough one for everyone, i think.

additionally, we looked into the washington project was somewhat of a bias against it. after meeting with representatives and with the san francisco waterfront partners and after a great deal of deliberation, the neighbors concluded that the current proposed development represents a better land use and will serve san francisco as a whole better than does the existing conditions. the specific aspects of the proposal which influence this conclusion include the reconnecting of the city to its waterfront, the increase the public open space, the creative means of stepping down of the building heights towards the embarcadero and the fact that the development will contribute to the revitalization of the area. please support the current version of the project. thank you.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. i am a resident of san francisco. i would like to thank the staff for their effort. i participated in a number of community meetings. they went to great lengths to get input on this project and their work has resulted in a very good project before you that i wholeheartedly support. i agree with sickness and other supporters have made but i am here to address one issue in particular. i'm fortunate to be a member hand it is ironic that they're claiming that this is for the 1%. we're dealing with a private club. i pay over $300 a month and a membership fees. in fact, here is my march bill.

this comes out to about $4,000 a year. it is my understanding that the renovation has been a significant part of 8 washington. it will be vastly improved and will better serve swimmers like me.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. i am the former telegraph hill dollars resident. the question is whether the final eir is adequate. if they are not on any score, we cannot book to certify it. we have a 17 member board, we have 600 members as part of the telegraph hill dwellers. we have been around since 1954 and it is with particular venom that i hear a lot of folks bring up the name telegraph hill dwellers. they are entitled to their opinion. this is not about creating jobs or housing, is not about how many tennis courts will or will not remain. what this is about are the

deficiencies of the i r. there is this failure to analyze the impact of surrounding projects. there is not one mention of a huge project at broadway and in market barrow. that on its face makes it the eir deficient. without that analysis, it is a huge problem. the america's cup, in our exhaustive letter, we said, if you have to analyze a temporary and long-term effect of the america's cup. the comments and respondents said, temporary is temporary, you don't have to look at that. what do we know? that is not acceptable. the analysis is an improper to live impact analysis. secondly, is that it impact, there is a lot of big