read or not completed or not signed. how do we know that people purchasing a limited number of condos in a small site -- i have never seen a project like this where the public have access. you might find this in a community in the homeowners association where there was a golf course, and they needed to underwrite some of the expenses, so they had non-resident memberships, but you will never find it, i don't believe, in a compact residential situation. that a purchaser for $2.5 million might force the 1600 people walking in and out of their facilities. i do not believe that those homeowners would allow it, and i think the first chance at the developer left and the seller of the property was no longer around, they would exercise their legal rights to change

the whole order document, which they can do under california law. i would like to see what legal arrangement has been made so that the protections for the remaining facilities run with the land, no matter whether the current parties are involved in the project or not. thank you. commissioner miguel: thank you. >> good afternoon, members of the commission. in a prior life, i started up the environmental review process in san francisco and was an environmental review officer from 1979 through 1985, just as an aside. having read through the eir, i do believe it is largely an adequate, accurate, and objective. there are some points, however, which it could be improved.

the final points about ferry building parking are apropos, and the final should be as accurate as possible in that. on page four, we talk about: terrace from telegraph hill looking se. this is one of three places from public areas where it is possible viewing the ferry building. the other two are on the altar street, which is a short, dead- end street. one can also see the ferry building, and i think that is in -- that is an important view. then, on page 4h3, where it mentions sue bierman park, i

think it would be worthwhile to mention that bought two or three, which is the one next to one maritime plaza, has been discussed as being able to accommodate four tennis courts or three tennis courts and one basketball court, which potentially could be funded by the eight washington, having inadequate recreation in the area. on pages 4h 10-12, the eir concludes that the project would not create the need for physically altered parking, would not have a significant effect on all opportunities. i concur with the. then, on page six, 24, and 30, where we talk about the alternative, which is to develop only eight washington, and the

alternative at the environmentally superior alternative, it does not include the fact that those alternatives would have aesthetic impact compared with the proposed project of a more abrupt step down from the golden gate with center tower to the embarcadero, and it would not contribute to the visual interest and improve the pedestrian experience along the embarcadero. i think that should be included in the environmentally superior alternative. commissioner miguel: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am president of the barbary coast neighborhood association. we represent 5000 residents and businesses all along the northeast embarcadero. two words come to mind when i read the draft eir -- incomplete

and inadequate. first point -- will not change the character of the neighborhood? are you kidding? this development will totally forever ruin many of the iconic views and aspects of life along the embarcadero for tourists and citizens alike. gridlock is already common on the embarcadero, particularly at the intersection of washington. the traffic portion of this study is totally inadequate, addressing such issues as pedestrians walking along washington, blocking the ingress of cars going along this massive parking garage. that is not mentioned at all. the garage itself is literally blowing away the city's transit policy. at this minute parking spaces to

an area that is already under such threat is not clearly delineated in the eir. water displacement issues -- when you put a garage down that far, the water is going to go somewhere that is being displaced, likely into,garages near residential buildings. the demographics of the project -- $2.5 million, $5 million, $7 million -- who knows how much the penthouse will cost fear not considered are the car trips of house leaders, dog walkers, caterers, dry cleaning trucks, plant watering services -- the many services that super rich people demand and get in their buildings not covered. finally, i would like to read to you the city's host and a new agreement of the america's cup. the city will use all lawful means to restrict noise and

debris generating activities on public works and large private construction projects in areas reasonably approximate to the event during the america's cup. this is ground zero for the america's cup not covered in the eir at all. thank you. commissioner miguel: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i live on polks street -- pulled -- polk street. i am sending you some views that were part of the original planning of the golden gate way.

my objection -- i find the draft eir and adequate in that it does not address how the significant use of coit tower and san francisco are going to be acquitted. they are very important for tourists to orient themselves by. this is a huge mass of a building. it is like bringing back the embarcadero freeway. it has that kind of impact. also, they have begun planning beginning with the demolition of the produce market. here is the first version of the golden gate way, and you can see that there are no large

buildings -- everything -- all the buildings are related to each other in placement of each other. there is nothing sort of stock in. they build back words and up. they do not come forward and build of -- they do not come forward and build up. after that, a student won an award doing this version, which is kind of an oscar niemeyer round building. so it seems to have sort of been influenced in the second version of what golden gate was supposed to look like. again, you see all the open space. one last thing i wanted to quote is when the embarcadero buildings with in in 1967, portman said in his presentation

today that all the office structures would be so designed and located on the side that a clear east/west deal is retained at the bay and around the very building appeared further, it is felt the lines of sight for view is high on the hills will tend to slide over the center building towards the bed. north/south views within center will be preserved through sharply hedge breaks in the structures. this is overall planning. this is not something stock in. everything was related to each other. thank you. commissioner miguel: thank you. [reading names] >> i have some handouts, just a brief period commissioner miguel: -- just a brief. commissioner miguel: you can

leave them right there. thank you. >> i am a professional pedestrian, working mother, and 13-year resident. >> this is the draft eir, which i agree is inadequate. it relies a bit on the ne waterfront study, which in my family and i brought my children here today. my husband is parking the car after getting them from camp. i and my family are in practically every meeting, and i

have yet to read the comments and thoughts and sentiment. the community did not support the waterfront study. at the time, there was financial consideration. the court was in dire need of money. it went into a non-competitive association to try to solve their manager problems, which are vast. i work at oracle. coming to the port will help relieve the financial pressures, and maybe they will rethink this noncompetitive financial process. but it is a money-making deal. we all know that. a few more facts to talk about -- this community we live in has the highest density of all districts in san francisco. i've been trying to live there with my family for 13 years. the least amount of active recreational space in all of san francisco -- you can say that

this is private if you will, but it is reasonably priced, and is the only active recreational space we have. my children, when they play soccer practice now, my son and his school -- they have to reserve space. they just cannot go out to any part and say let's have a thick of the game. all of the schools reserve space. this is not just a single problem here there's not enough in the entire city, and not enough where we live. they might play a little softer across the street, but there are no picket games. even though we just read to the park, there is no soccer space. wall space. a small space. name the sport, there's no place you are going to run around and get any kind of great activity going. so there's a big issue. are taking away what is very important to the community. there is a big omission -- [bell rings]

commissioner miguel: thank you. >> i worked at golden gate tennis and swim club. i have never heard one tourist say they really like a high rise, but what they talk about are the views, the ambiance, the water, the parks, the spaces, and the healthy looking people in san francisco. we have very healthy looking people. i went on to the website of the planning organization to figure out what i'm trying to say. the first thing i came about was one, they said the planning department places protection and preservation at the very top of its list of priorities. interesting because this is a club that is going to be demolished. second, improvement in the city as a place for a living by aiding and making it more healthful promise is pleasant

and satisfying with representing good standards for all residents and providing adequate open spaces and appropriate community facilities. the third point i found was that the established priority policies says our parks and open space and their access to sunlight be protected from demolition. here i have this health club that is going to be demolished propose. it is helpful. it is pleasant. has been there for 50 years. right now, if i was not here, i would be swimming with 50 other tenants. i live at market and castro. i go on muni every day and back to get there. i am not rich, but i am healthy because of this club. it is the only club like this in the city and in the state, and i am willing to say in america because it is in the center of urban development. you have nine tennis courts and

two open pools. this is unheard of. you have the most amazing amenity right in front of your city, and it is in danger. playland is gone. i'm old, so i can talk about it. what is in play line right now? you have to protect your city. it is all you have got. we do not have much left here. san francisco is promoting the destruction of a lively, along with, bribing sports community, and make no mistake -- demolished, and it will be destroyed. it is the only sanford cisco sports facility like it, like i said. it is a retrograde step demolition of a functioning and thriving community, and it goes against freethinking, but also

goes against its planning guidelines. innovators and town planning -- [bell rings] [applause] commissioner miguel: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am the founder and spokesperson for waterfront for all. we are a grassroots organization of san francisco residents committed to proactive engagement on the waterfront development and other activities from the at&t part to fort mason. the embarcadero has the potential to be one of the world's great boulevards, brimming of vibrant open waterfront. first and foremost, we should make better use of sea wall lots that are currently served as parking lots. while i understand how many

people are here trouble with the loss of their private club the way their community is today, there is a much better use for that lot. we should encourage land uses that serve as the transition of the day and the rest of the city. ideally, these uses would promote an active and publicly accessible waterfront. i will be providing more detailed comments on the draft eir, but from my initial review, i am convinced there are no impacts that out with the benefits of the project here the project is a meaningful opportunity to replace surface lots and the infamous green tennis ball with pedestrian- friendly publicly accessible open space with ground-floor commercial dense housing along one of our major transit thoroughfares. given the number of public and private recreation facilities in the area, -- i, for one, and a member of the gulf and club. i swim down there all the time.

i think that the project sponsors' efforts to maintain some of the club adequately addresses the recreation needs. i appreciate this opportunity to support a smart development, and i hope this development will serve as a catalyst to change and create better uses on the other surface parking lots as well. thank you for your time. commissioner miguel: thank you. >> i live at 155 jackson st. in san francisco. my focus is directed to park 4h recreation, which is biased toward concluding demolition at reduction of the golden gate tennis and swim club, in significantly impact the recreation in the project area.

it is and -- if the development proceeds, the development will be demolished and unavailable for at least 24 months. the green open space will be replaced with a restaurant, retail, and residential buildings. the swimming pools will be on top of the fitness building, making entrants more difficult for seniors and kids now using level entrance. the deir page 7 classifies this an insignificant impact because the site area is not considered high need. mainly using information from the 1980 u.s. census, updating from the 2000 census but failing to reference the recent 2010 census, which is partly available from the early 2011. on page 12 and 13, some of the

consequences of the two-year closure of the club are cited, and i quote, unquote the interim closure -- "the interim closure would displace current users of the club. they would be forced to find other recreational opportunities. users might choose different forms of recreation. others might search others mighr replacements facilities. these facilities can be used in the workplace. other private facilities can cost more than the golden gate ways when club. public facilities might not be of equal quality. we find this insignificant. page eight cites the 2004 recreation and parks assessment evaluating the needs of san francisco residents the reports that the eight washington street sites are not within the defined service area for full tennis and basketball courts.

yet it concludes that the impact of the closure and the reduction of the club is insignificant. overlooking this fact. the club is in district 3 that has the lowest level of recreation resources of any district in the city. any reduction in size or access to the club forcing residents of the apartments to depend on the facilities must be considered significant. thank you for your attention. >> commissioners, i live at 155 jackson st.. from my apartment, i have a view of the jackson streets. i wish to address transportation

issues and the fourth part. it is amazing that the eir proposes only minor remedies for traffic and congestion. the fourth part is based on the study of a single weekday afternoon and a half four years ago. there are to russia hours every day. and there are several on weekends. and these times, traffic is bumper-to-bumper and the nearby streets are cars escaping. due to the random nature of traffic, it can occur almost any time. we know the bumper-to-bumper traffic generates pollution.

a significant component are well known as carcinogens. with many stores and abroad, more than 400 spaces will aggravate the current nexus of congestion. in addition to the increase of automobile traffic, the proposed narrowing will further magnified congestion as will the elimination of the turn. it is of the mark. the turning traffic and short

tons is a to think the cars going to the project is simply the project abroad. a round the corner, the west side already has too grudging entrances. it will become an ugly ballet, certainly a poor way to connect the city to the waterfront. in conclusion, this is grossly inadequate with regard to automobile pollution and failing to protect the rights of pedestrians. thank you for your attention.

>> good afternoon, mr. president. speaking on behalf of maritime unions. and an affiliate. we are the people that were in san francisco bay. what was how they care so much about this project? we do because is actually a linchpin for the second phase of development of the terminal expansion right next to the building. we are probably in a similar boat as the ferry building tenants, and being very much interested replacing the parking because it is not replaced and

their economic interests are not protected. then the expansion of the terminal project for treasure island and additional capacity and for earthquake response where the city and the region does not go forward. there are $20 million of bridge toll money and millions more of state bond money that the city would lose the fat replacement parking cannot be found. we have spent many years of attending these hearings, seeing the great effort that the developer has put into the concerns of the community and as we read this report, we believe they have done a good job in assessing the impact and that the public and benefits of way the impact of the local community.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. it is interesting what she just said about the developer being sent into the community. i recall one of the first meeting is the developer had with and the community to explain his project and it was a very good first step for him. during this meeting, someone ask him if he could give us a sense of how much these condominiums would cost and he did not respond immediately. his response was, they will leave the most expensive in the city.

this did not have a very positive effect on me, for sure. and i expect many people in the room. we don't need a more expensive condominiums in the city. you've of that. and of who buys there? the people that will be contributing to the community. people that will fly and. it will be a high percentage of the people there. i want to address the recreational aspect of this because that is why i go to the club. i swam. i have a back problem, and recreation is very important to me. i will take issue with what they said of of this project providing more open space. this is false and it certainly