speaker cards from the public. dave stockdale? >> good afternoon. i am it the executive director of quesa. in my capacity, i am representing our 115 small businesses who worked out of this location. i know there are a lot of people who want to comment, so i will keep my very short. i will just say that we really appreciate the partnerships that have been evolving in this project. the redesign, the green nature of the project. we really like the evolution of what we have been seeing, and we continue to support this concept and what it will mean for us as small businesses in this area. yes, there will be some short- term inconveniences during construction, and issues we have to contend with.

but offsets in the long term by the benefits of a nearby parking, which we need, new residents, meaning potential shoppers, which we always enjoy it as small businesses, and just a much more of an end connected part of the waterfront that really makes the connection from the waterfront, through the business residential community and to the rest of the neighborhood. we think it is a strong plan and offer our support for it. >> thank you. victor wu? >> good afternoon, commissioners. thank you. those are the senior vice president of operations for a club. we own and operate the various number of luxury clubs in the bay area and four in san francisco. we are the operator of the

golden gate way tennis and swim club. we were asked to bridges. in the design of the club and the outdoor and indoor areas. when looking at the design and the space that is available, we really feel that it is the best design for our membership, as a majority of our memberships are in the aquatics and fitness and base. and we look forward to operating the club and look forward to doing a great job in operating the club. >> ok, thank you. jennifer warbrooke? >> good afternoon. i am it the assistant executive director at the spur, the sentence is the planning urban research association. we support the seawall lot 351 project. we believe it is a significant improvement for a key parcel on the northern waterfront.

eight washington is a unique opportunity to replace the surface parking lot and private club with housing, pedestrian- friendly, publicly-accessible open space, a renovated space-to visit club, a ground-floor retail, underground parking. we're pleased with the latest proposal, which includes an aquatics into, green roofs, and a 4,500 square-foot playground with then the public park along the embarcadero. spur supports the project height, would convince the skill of the surrounding neighborhoods. the sponsor has made adjustments for the design and skill of the building to reflect the skill of the surrounding buildings and allow for some doubled since the. given the approximately two much taller buildings, the scale is modest inappropriate. this is located adjacent to many major transportation lines, including bart, muni, and ferry lines. and there is the employment

center in san francisco downtown to encourage people to bicycle, walk, and use transit. we are impressed with the public access components of the project. the public park in landscaped commons, and the effort to reconnect the city streets to the waterfront. spur strongly believes of the project will radically improve the pedestrian experience on the western side of the embarcadero. pedestrians are currently met with the high green cents. the current use does nothing to activate the importance street frontage and attract significantly from the pedestrian experience. i am member of the golden gate way tennis and swim club. i am headed there to slam today, and also looking forward to the improvements this project will make. spur and i will support this important project. thank you. >> thank you. next. >> good afternoon, commissioner.

corrine woods, speaking for myself. this is a good project, good for the poor, good for the city. the publicly accessible open spaces marvelous. opening it up to pacific and jackson streets to views and pedestrians is a tremendous benefit for this neighborhood. and for the city. i urge you to support it. thank you. >> thank you. jon stewart. >> thank you for your attention. i am -- in my business life, i am in the real-estate world. i am here speaking as a resident of telegraph hill, over here. and i am very much in support of

the developers' proposal and almost every respect. in my business life, i got a lot of planning conferences, and there is a uniform the crying of the absence of projects, a lot of hand-wringing over the fact that we're not really getting the kind of quality that we want. many people say, why do we not have a product that has a nexus of transit, where we have people living and working in the same area? here, we have just that. we have water, a ferry, water taxis, rail, bikes, bus. i look at this project not only as -- at the forstall condominiums, which offers inner city living, which is highly desirable, white at the tod, as

well as many other things. when the bottom, we're going to of people living in town using cars, to some extent, but the impact on the bridge, because of the location of this project, will be less than the standard stuff that you see in this country. i like the design elements that seidman has introduced -- simon has introduced. in particular, if the past is prologue, i really like the quality of the work that he did hepier 1.5, 3, and 5. the thing speaks for itself. >> thank you. next. >> commissioners. i am from the san francisco

trade this area. i have spare you the little ground normally drive with me to these things. i am is thinking myself this time. i am sure it will have occasion to bring that back in the future. i want to reiterate our continuing support for this. it has continued to improve. i am it especially excited by the replacement of parking and a green screen along the embarcadero. with these things on one stretch and the sight of children playing on another. that is all good. the project with the green roof now will actually decrease the impact on the city's sewer system that might once have had. it continues to get better and better. we look forward to this being built eventually. thank you. >> thank you. next.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. i have lived at the golden gateway center for 22 years. i am currently president of the golden gate way tenants association. on many occasions, we have outlined our many reasons for opposing this project. we continue that opposition. the new thing i have heard today is that there is an adjustment to the plan to decrease the number of tennis courts by four. i do not know how many tennis courts that leaves in the plan. i am not clear on that. but i would like to add that to the number of reasons for our opposition. thank you. >> next. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i cannot wait to hear what 500

tennis players will have to say tomorrow when they hear about this plan. but let's move on from there. i am somewhat limited tonight because i thought we had an overhead projector. i had some transparencies. with your permission, i would like to circulate some copies of what we see as the real problem. for those of you in the audience who cannot see this, it will be on the website. i chair the friends of golden gateway. our concern is with the park, the difference in openness and height. we will now begin to lose washington street.

it will be a wall of glass and brick or concrete or what ever you have it. the other view on the second page is what happens to the view of telegraph hill. there is an excellent presentation on the. if the club is going to change profile as suggested today, we are putting a dagger into hundreds of middle-class families and seniors who now enjoy the facility as we have it now. there can be improvements. but to take away nine tennis courts -- there are nine there now. to build the highest priced

condominiums in the city, all i want to know is when we put a sign that says "this property is only for the very rich. " it is an insult to the integrity of all of the work -- it is an insult to the integrity of all the work the neighborhood groups have done. we will continue our battle. we feel this was promised to the community over 40 years ago. we wish to maintain its. thank you. >> maureen aronirwin. >> i am here to read a letter submitted in support of the project. >> i am writing to express my personal support for the

washington project. as a fourth generation san franciscan, i have been here long enough to live through the morning 30 years -- through the more than 30 years of the embarcadero. during those years, changes were made on the monstrosity. that may been the highest use of the land at the time, but times have changed. since the removal of the freeway, we have seen historic buildings come alive again. we have seen the vibrant addition of cafe americano. we have seen the streetcars, viceless the close -- bicyclist, and pedestrians. as i understand it, the proposed washington project preserves the recreational features of the project site. it brings a handsome new face to the critical corner of the plaza area with residential units that

will provide much-needed property tax revenues to the city while removing the blight of surface parking from the visible location. as evidenced by the piers project, this developer has demonstrated a sensitivity to urban context and the ability to create in beijing and vibrant spaces for people. joining with many others, i urge you to approve the project and further enhance our northeastern waterfront. thank you. >> next. >> i am a neighbor. i have lived on telegraph hill for 22 years. i was a member of the telegraph hill and other club for 22 years. we do research, design, and development for condominium projects.

we have really worked on watermark, embarcadero, 600 units on an affinity, right now, we are on hawthorne and mission bay. we are familiar with the area. to report a lack of new products coming on the market, several years ago, there were sales for immediate occupancy. i think a year from today, we would be down to just a couple of hundred units. in 2006 and 2007, approximately 500 units were permitted for construction each quarter for sale. 500 units per quarter. if we look at 2008 , to does mind, and 2010, it dropped down to 150 per quarter. the third quarter, we're down to 70 units for sale permitted by construction. we're down to 14% of the number

of units permitted just for five years ago. as we all understand, it takes approximately t of years to build any project of size. even if a shovel got into the ground next year, we would not see new product until 2014. i think this situation will be exacerbated late next year. there were 24 projects for sale a year ago. we're down to 11. most of those only have single- digit units left. i am an advocate of the project. i think it is well done. i made major walker in this town. one thing i do not do is walk on this side of the embarcadero at night. i feel is not that safe. i feel it is a real plus to the city and closing the missing

link with the embarcadero. thank you. >> tim cohen. >> good afternoon. i run the san francisco housing action coalition. we have supported this project. we believe it will bring enormous benefits to the city. indespite the controversy and redder, it is is simple land-use question. should it remain a surface parking lot or not? if not a parking lot, what should it become? >> the opposition to converting a parking lot comes from a relatively small group that are overwhelmingly white, older, and upper-middle-class that live in one of the most pleasant neighborhoods in the city. these folks are grieved and oppressed because new housing has been proposed for the neighborhood. it should be noted the housing

they live in itself displaced an earlier generation of businesses and residents. it was not sand dunes down here with the golden gateway was redeveloped. many of the folks opposing the project have lived for decades in mid-controlled house in -- housing. this is a curious platform from which to oppose new housing. it displaces no one unless you count private tennis courses. the accusation against the project is that it will become luxury housing, this is some of the most valuable land in northern california. on the other hand, through city decisions and policies, the city has said if land is developed for pricing -- for private housing, it must pay for a basket of civic duties. this would include rent to the city, fees to support subsidized housing, a privately maintained

park, a new recreational facilities, in the walkway to access the waterfront, and a street scape on the side of the embarcadero that needs it the most. these are not small benefits nor cheap. on the eternal question of tight, the proposed project is 1/4 height of the closest commercial building and 1/2 of the golden gate we center. this project is nestled among the tallest buildings on our skyline. is this not a good location for it? we would ask that the city use -- choose a land use alternative that benefits the largest number and not just those in a single neighborhood. we have never heard an argument on how the city would benefit from turning this project down. >> good afternoon. i would be happy to tell the

truth about this project. it is a deeply flawed development proposal, the worst i have witnessed in 25 years of living here. 99% of the people are against it with good reason. they complain about a 12 foot fence. what is that compared to a 13 story building? it violates the waterfront land use plan that recommends connecting it to the bay. this is not connecting the land. it is locking the land. the view of historic buildings will be blocked. that is against the rules. nobody talked about these things. how about the traffic gridlock double enter and exit on washington street, a very narrow street with heavy traffic in all directions? you can hardly cross its safely

even with lights installed. i defeated a garage for all the good reasons. there is nothing that connects it. they also want to put entrances and exits on another street. that is ridiculous. that is why it went down. the fact that it is going to destroy the club is very true. i wish you people walk over to the club and see the most beautiful lounge area and a swimming pool constructed. they will slice of that away for the top of a roof that is not beautiful. they will destroy all of the hispanic dealings of it. the need is not for condominiums. it is for affordable housing. that is what families are moving out of san francisco.

let's put of things that are sensible. the reason people cannot walk or do not want to walk on the west side of the sidewalk of the embarcadero is because when we created the embarcadero as a part, and begged them to put sodium lights on the embarcadero and light it up so that it would be bright and inviting. they did not do it. that is the reason people do not want to walk there. we need that lighting. the character of the buildings it looks like mission bay. it is a disaster. we do not need this on the corner. where is the traffic study? you have gridlock now. you have exploratorium

coming down the pike. that will bring more traffic. we cannot develop every inch of the city. it is not sustainable. thank you. >> next. >> good afternoon, commissioners. it pains me as a longtime resident since 1964 to see the commission being asked to approve a project which is the first step in building the northeast waterfront like it is south of market. i agree with many of the things they are saying about what they would do to make that portion of the embarcadero more friendly. but to add a building which

violates everything that was in the northwest region northeast waterfront plan -- northeast waterfront plan, to say you are just adding one building, but this is the first step. if you approve this, what is the reason you cannot build another building like this on the corner of broadway? the next one on the corner of vallejo? suddenly, we're going to have the waterfront be nothing but high rise buildings. many of us would have opposed the golden gateway construction. at least it was a few blocks away. this is right on the embarcadero. you can talk all about how nice it will be. but what is going to happen if this project is approved? speaking only for myself, not

speaking for fog, i understand the arguments as to why the tennis club feels it detracts. clearly that tennis club could be there to deal with the problem they say is on the embarcadero without granting -- if only for economic reasons. there is no other reason for allowing a building to be built that close on the embarcadero. i respectfully request that you disapprove it. thank you. >> veronica sanchez. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am speaking for two maritime unions. the captains on the ferry boats in san francisco bay and the

deck hands. both of our unions have been very supportive of this project from the beginning. it is the linchpin for another big chunk of money to the region. since the late 1990's when i worked at the port, we were trying to get money for phase two of very terminal development for the additional births south of the ferry building. the money dried up. for seven years, there has been a tug of $20 million available from bridge toll money to fund the next phase of that development. how is that related to this project? why is washington street a linchpin for that funding? it is now designated to the water emergency transportation

authority. it is because the project will replace the over the water parking that must be removed to get the ferry terminal expansion permitted. we have participated in the process from the beginning, attending many community meetings. we are pleased by the improvement that the team has made to the project. i am a resident of san francisco. i live in the outer mission where we barely have any open space at all. what i have seen on the screen today is unbelievable. you are welcome in my neighborhood any time to do a project of this caliber. we would make you the grand marshal of our fourth of july parade in my neighborhood. they care very much. we look forward to continuing to

see this project through the approval process. >> next. >> i am jane connors. i have the honor of managing the ferry building for the last nine years. we know that the proximity of parking and management a parking is skilled -- key for retail businesses downstairs. my comment today is one question to the developer. one of our concerns is the length of the construction process for the project. it is estimated anywhere between three and five years. we would like to know where the substitute parking where the ferry building would be if the project went forward.

that is a question for the port and the developer. >> next. >> good afternoon. i am here today on behalf of the recreation and open space group for the waterfront. i have been the chair of it for 12 years. i want to thank him for his extensive efforts and for bringing to light the proposed project to replace all of the tennis courts with swimming activities. i also want to bring to your attention the length of the history of this project. there have now been four attempts tan