president chiu: welcome back to the board of supervisors meeting. i would ask people to take their seats. i think are stenographers are back in action. we appreciate your patience. why don't we go back to public comment on behalf of the appellants? >> good evening, supervisors.

my husband and i have been san francisco resident since 1994. the boats operate small businesses in the city. we -- we both operate small businesses in the city. we both realize that change is inevitable. the 8 washington street represents the wrong kind of change. it destroys a vibrant, existing community. there was no initiation fee when i joined the gateway. my husband and i love the fact that be regularly meet new friends at the gateway. gateway is unlike any other kennedy center were i have spent time.

-- unlike any other community center where i have spent time. it is a place where i can spend time your children and elderly alike. it is a gem in the crown of san francisco. the washington street project is not a community center. not a space for family tennis. not an adequate space for a recreational meeting place. i urge you to reject the 8 washington street project. thank you. >> good evening. i am an attorney and business owner in san francisco. i am a member of golden gate club. i wanted to vote no on the project.

we love this beautiful community. what are you doing? building 100 units and ruining a wonderful community of over 3000 people? building a home to ruin a community does not make any sense. one thing that really upsets me, i see a lot of people saying families for 8 washington street project. what families? certainly not my family. we are against this project. my family is against this project. many families enjoy the benefits

of this recreation. get this -- they tell us, the people who want to build 8 washington street project, ptolemy i will benefits. i would be likely to buy a condominium in this area. i will never do it in a million years. if they take down at the swimming club, and there is no reason for me to live in this city. i do not want to buy a house in the sinking ground that is going to crumble. president chiu: let me call the following individuals to line up. [reading names]

next speaker. >> i have been involved in the waterfront since 1987. i have served on many advisory groups. i've also been a 54-year resident of telegraph hill. i am here to speak to the eir. regarding the condition of use authorization, it represents spot zoning. extending special privilege to this developer. spot zoning is widely viewed as illegal. it compromises the planning process. you are rewarding the golden gateway -- they have exploited a loophole in prop. 13.

has been gradually converting the golden gateway to short-term rental and hotel use without ever going for the regulatory process. you are aiding and abetting and rewarding despite his playground flaunting of our laws. i would like to argue that the process was compromised and incomplete in a clearly vindictive mood. three months after the deadline for public comment on the project. this was a change in the project and the draft eir should have been revised and reopened to public comment. i would like to point out that this project is the most blatant example of excess on the part of the 1% that i have seen. i would like to see the -- york -- i hope you'll keep this in

mind in determining how he will vote today. thank you. president chiu: next speaker. >> i am currently working as a citizen with the recreation as a group of citizens who have been working with the city's strategic planning department. with the recreation and open space elements, we are going to introduce a 25-year plan for how the city uses recreation and open space. a lot has been said about having the open space and what it is providing. what is not there and this plan is the recreation. the national recreation parks association says that for a city of our size, we should have 400 tennis courts.

in 2007, we had 156. today, we have 128. the number of public tennis courts is dropping very quickly. you have seen the of the poor conditions of this tennis court. they are going to rely on private funds to help them sustain themselves. our public tennis courts at golden gate park and some had been renovated by the olympic club. there is a another private entity that has renovated other tennis courts. we're taking a look at the privatization of our public and preservation of our private for the use of the public. that is an extremely important part when you start to consider the fact that you are going to allow huge height as well as bulk to replace recreation when you have an option. with regard to standards,

swimming pools. a city in this size should have 40 swimming pools. today, it has nine. you are taking away to private pools. -- two private pools. there will be more interest in swimming. i do not believe you should increase the bulk, provide a conditional use. president chiu: next speaker. >> i'll let that 155 jackson st.. there are many -- i live at 155 jackson st.. there are many reasons why you should not approve the 8 washington street project. it violates [inaudible]

changes in trust should rarely be made and only when benefits the common good. luxury condos do not to fill this requirement. it violates the except if trends in heights along the northeast waterfront. it asks for a rezoning of the height. the underground parking facilities allocates excessive to the luxury condos and does not solve the parking problem. it destroys the golden gate wait tennis and swim club. a unique recreation facility used by thousands of san francisco citizens. it will increase ingestion and pollution along the very busy intersection of the embarcadero and washington street.

the eir does not address this issue. it was based on incomplete study of peak power embarcadero traffic on a single weekday afternoon five years ago. the revised eir include similar incomplete data. a real transportation study has not been done. i urge the supervisors not to approve this project. thank you. president chiu: thank you, next speaker. >> hello. michael taylor, long-term resident of the neighborhood and tennis player. the demolition of the club will

erase outdoor tennis on the east side of san francisco. sftc is indoors. conditions are very windy. competitive tennis needs maintenance of tennis courts. and also reservation times. the only other possible reservation times in golden gate park, those courts tend to be very clustered together. a lot of the balls are running back and forth. these are not sufficient to alternatives to the destruction of the golden gate tennis club. shuttling over is not going to be feasible. we need a local residential recreation place to play tennis.

this has been serving the neighborhood for the last 30 years. this is one of the reasons that i took up residence there. it was right near beit and i did not have to drive a car anywhere -- nearby and i did not have to drive a car anywhere. it was right across the street. if you demolished this tennis courts, you are going to lose a lot in the neighborhood. competitive tennis in san francisco as well. thank you. president chiu: next speaker. >> good evening. i live in golden gateway. i realize the purpose of this meeting is not to review all the details from all these meetings. i recognize you are looking at political considerations. i think you should consider the ultimate finding of fact in the eir that said there was no undue

burden on recreation as a result of approving the development. the original eir stated that the club would be replaced by eight smaller facility -- by a smaller facility. we objected and said there is no restriction in the deed being offered. how do we know that will survive? we were told that was there was a letter? they responded that there is a letter. here is a letter. the letter states [inaudible] it is currently open to members of the public who purchase a membership. some members of the community are concerned that the new health clubs and fitness facility would eventually be closed. this letter confirms, as owner of the property, the honorable

consent to a condition of approval -- the owner will consent to a condition of approval. [inaudible] it's a means the transition, they could open a club, then close it, transfer to the homeowners' association. this is not a deed restriction. i ask adding minimum there should be a -- at a minimum, there should be a deed restriction for recreational use, and recreational use available to the public. thank you. president chiu: next speaker. >> good evening, supervisors. i am the vice president with the neighborhood association, representing the thousands of residents and businesses. our association has long objected to be 8 washington street development for many of

the reasons that have already been outlined. too much height, too much congesting talent to much bulk. -- too much congesting comment too much bull. what is disturbing is that the proponents have twisted the positions to those who object to this inappropriate development. if you read the opinion pieces, it sounds like we want to maintain the parking lots along the embarcadero. nothing could be farther from the truth. our association believes that the only comprehensive urban plan for the any waterfront, the vision plan offers something that has been vetted by the community and is a viable document for the future. the sea wall lots should not be parking lot. they should be developed and they should be developed within

the public trust doctrine, which permits a hotel sites, bicycle emporiums, senior centers, and so forth. these can all be developed consistent with the public trust doctrine. in conclusion, i urge you to bring this project into compliance with the standards by reducing the height, bolt, shuttling, parking. or better yet, stop this inappropriate development altogether. thank you. president chiu: next speaker. >> good evening, supervisors. i urge you to vote no on the approval of the 8 washington street eir. i am a volunteer. i am not getting paid to be here. most people -- the proposed

project is a disaster for recreation. this has been carried forward from the nes. we offered a viable alternative. we never had a fair chance. the fix was and. -- was in. as discussed in the er, reiterated below, the construction when not remove the recreation source. -- as discussed in the eir, reiterated below, the construction would not remove a recreation and source. this is the big dog in the room. destruction of active recreation, and 80,000 square feet. what would be left is 21,000 aquatics center. not an expanded facility as

advertised. what about policy 2.11? how can you folks possibly vote for this? if this were a fair fight, we would have won this year's ago. you can fix this. president chiu: next speaker. >> good evening, supervisors. you would think that with all the days compelling arguments against the project it would be a no-brainer to turn it down. i am and finance. let's talk money. that is really what this is all about. with the number of condos that will be put in and the prices they will sell for, this could be a $450 million project.

the profits on this, let's suppose it is a 50% margin, it could be $200 million that our developer wants to make on this. you would think that for that kind of profit and that kind of half a billion dollars worth of revenues, you would be able to -- he would pay a ton of money for the keys to the kingdom. he would be wrong. if you look at the document, which i have done, about two or three times, he is paying $5 million to get to the sea wall lot. he gets a $5 million public finance district rebate for qualified development costs. it means the improvements to

make the grounds beautiful for all of the people who will on these condos. take a look at the infrastructure finance district, the infrastructure finance plan, public use financing, i think the city is getting hosed. you really need to have someone who knows a finance take a look at this. president chiu: next speaker, please. >> good evening. i'm barbara stewart. in the eir, the planning department acknowledged the sea level rise poses significant danger to be 8 washington street site. it is unavoidable and then dropped the entire issue. it did not -- it not only ignored findings of the

scientific panel, but also two major studies in the san francisco bay. now we have new research findings that cannot be ignored. a study reported in "the new york times on march 13 conducted by climate central calculated there is a high degree of probability that as early as 2013, san francisco bay will rise -- 2030, san francisco bay will rise 10 feet. almost there are major changes in climate -- unless there are major changes in climate, the water levels will continue to rise and flood. i would like to take a moment to introduce my friend and spouse

to give you some information about him so you have confidence in what he is going to say. he was insurance commissioner for the state of new york, general counsel of citibank, chief financial officer, and co- founder of storage economics -- stuart economics. i turned over to mr. stewart. -- i turn it over to mr. stewart. >> the water levels, which you

have just heard discussed, lead right to where the money is. we have not been given any specific information about this deal. we can certainly attest -- test the physical probabilities' against a normal financial structure. let's suppose that a one and six flooding event did occur, took the garage, but left the above- ground building standing. how was the sponsor, the working capital lenders, make out? the short answer is very differently. take the top.

the long-term lender would be gone. it would be wiped out. the middle level, the bank, might or might not be able to get some money out if it moved fast. the sponsor, however, having been paid as he went, would have all of his money in hand. he would be home free. against those different rewards, and against the interesting incentives they provide, what insurance underwriter is going to write the property insurance on this thing? what pension investment officer is going to sign off on a 30- year loan? what a bank lending officer