my name is ray, i live at golden gate way and i have been there for over 25 years. what i am asking you to consider is an obligation that you have as legislators and lawmakers to try to leave this city a better place for our children and our grandchildren. and for the life of me, i can't figure out how to get rid of nine tennis courts and two swimming pools is going to make this city better for children and grandchildren. i urge you to think about not your generation, but the generations to come, and what are they going to do to replace something as wonderful as this activity? thank you. houg>> have a small business owr

in san francisco. my apologies to the labour community here, i appreciate the need to create more jobs. i regularly walk picket lines in support of working men and women. i am amazed by this. i am hearing that the outcome of the race is not only for the democratic county central committee and a membership on this body are at stake in this vote. that, to me, is incredible. i see the forces for development moving very strongly, and to me, it represents a move to the right by the democratic party. in particular, next up is the peace in the paper yesterday about how everyone of you signed a letter to the golden state

warriors. to build yet another large facility on the waterfront. i look forward to that debate when it comes forward. finally, i wanted to say that the san francisco green party stands united in opposopposing s project. [chime] president chiu: next speaker. >> hi, my name is hiroko, i have a resident in san francisco and i have been an active member of golden gate way tennis club since 2007. i use the facility three or four times a week. using the facility regularly has become a very important part of my life. when changing jobs in 2007, i specifically chose san

francisco home so that i can maintain my life in the city, were privately without owning a car. i believe there are many members that like to maintain their work just because of having the club where it is. consider that this kind of project may push people like me to move away from the city of san francisco. on a less personal level, i believe having a high-rise condominium will disturb the view of the area, especially the view of the day that is one of the most important landmarks in the area, disturbing to the locals. especially the area is one of the most convenient locations.

striving to become green is one of the city's biggest goals, and this project is -- [chime] i am here to express my strong opposition to the project. >> my name is suzanne radcliffe, i have been a citizen of san francisco since 1969. i have had a business in this city, i have employed hundreds of san franciscans in that business and i have raised a child here. i am now retired. i have been a member of the golden gate tennis and swim club for over 25 years. i need this when there every day. i cannot use the public pools because they are not open and available for swimming every day. the cost is about the same.

i don't like to hear it mentioned as a private club because it is a club you have to pay for, but anyone can belong. this has been fraught with dishonesty, it is inappropriate. i want to tell you one thing. i have a daughter that will not move back to san francisco because she said, mom, the city is not kid friendly. i grew up there and i knew from the time i was in school -- the only fun i had was that the golden gate tennis and swim club because you can be there with me in the open space. we can have a picnic, who go swimming, and we can have a good time where it was safe. president chiu: after the next

speaker, i have been asked by the stenographers if we can take a five minute break so they can do their tapes. we have plenty of folks that want to speak on behalf of the appellant. do we have the next speaker? >> i have been a member of the golden gate some clever over 20 years, and i just have a few comments and rhetorical questions about this project. how can anyone who lives in san francisco want a big, visual block between the water and our neighborhoods? they violate city code for whites. -- heights. how can any of the young schoolchildren possibly be for this project? 8 washington goes against the public trust concept of open

space. a public trust land cannot be used for building residencies, apparently. the workers that came here today, can they get jobs just as well, and more long-term, sustainable employment with the asian neighborhood design plan? which is feasible, intelligent, and humane. why can the city give variances or conditional use permits for expensive condominiums? many of my artist friends can no longer afford to live in san francisco. this has been a great loss to our city. please vote no. [chime] president chiu: why don't we take a five minute recess, if the three individuals are in line, feel free to

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