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 is going to sign for five years? finally, what are public servants supposed to do when faced with these -- with this kind of a situation --

[inaudible] president chiu: thank you very much. thank you very much. next speaker. >> i am the attorney. i want to talk about the eir. there were too done for golden gateway in 1972 and 1975. both of them dealt with heights at the waterfront. neither of them are mentioned in the eir at all. i have submitted them into the record. the conclusion in 1972 was the heights of golden gateway would not comply with the urban design plan because it would obstruct

views. the result of that was a reduction in height to 84 feet. the second eir, the project changed after the eir comments for done. it changed by eliminating the tennis courts. the elimination of a large chunk of the recreation opportunities. going to the conditional use, i have a map of the land swap. it is a little hard to read because it is a very weird lancelot. this land at the bottom -- land swap. this land along the bottom is in the public trust. you have a planned unit development that basically says -- it does not apply to court property. the port property is what is providing the open space for this site. i do not even know that you can

consider this until the port has voted and decided whether they will accept the rules. you're going to see a slide show. it will be like all the other slide shows. please understand, across the street from this is a big city park. across washington street, you should be ashamed that you do not know what this is going to look like at street level from the park. thank you. president chiu: next speaker. >> good evening. nice to see you all. i am speaking for the affordable housing alliance. one of the things i have learned is second chances do not come along very often. when you do get a second chance, you really do not want

to blow it. when the embarcadero freeway came down, the any waterfront got a second chance. we are poised to blow that by making a bigger mistake. we are looking at building a wall of condominiums. 80 feet higher than the embarcadero freeway. condominiums that will go between 2.5 and $7.5 million. that has to be affordable to the 1%. all on the side of a community recreation facility. -- all on the side of the community recreation facility. we do not want to make this mistake. one of the benefits of this project is by the sponsors -- when they build it, they will provide funding for 27, 28 units of affordable housing costs side. we already have that housing and we have it right now at the

golden gateway apartments. they are part of the development team. there are 1254 apartments at the golden gateway. we about the opportunity to survey 341 of those. of those, 46 are rented out to businesses as hotel units. if we could put those back into the rental housing stock, we would have more than the 27 units. we have a second chance. let's not blow it. thank you. president chiu: i am going to call the rest of the names that i have. [reading names]

please lineup if you have not had a chance to speak. next speaker. >> it is hard to believe there could be anything more to say. i do want to say that i do belong to the club, but i'd live in supervisor farrell district. this is a citywide issue. that is why i want to speak.

the real estate in question, it belongs to all of us. it is one of our most processed -- precious assets. it is our grand, not -- grand promenade. this has been a grass-roots effort since 2005. you know that is a pretty tough thing to top. you can get citizens that interested and caring that much. this is spot zoning at its very worst. it will open the floodgates for further high-rise development along the embarcadero. today, -- tomorrow, it will be a

another developer that can outspend, out-lawyer in the resistance. the previous speaker said what i wanted to say, too. what happened in 1989? we had an earthquake. let's not blow the opportunity again. thank you. >president chiu: next speaker. >> good evening, supervisors. there is no need for a super luxury condo. it is all about greed. this is the height of corruption and architectural atrocity.

san francisco is a transit first city. cars are discouraged in europe and even in portland, oregon. space is available at the golden gateway center. the golden gate slam and tennis club -- recreation is in the shortest supply, at the worst and the city. do not cut it out. do not be an accomplice to corruption. the planning department has no idea about real-estate trade that was my game. you do real estate with a balance. location is the important thing.

this weight -- this goes all the way down to the sidewalk. there is no need for retail, there is no foot traffic. empty stores all the embarcadero. take a walk. take a hike and see what is going on. do not give in to this corruption. let us have more open space the way it should be. thank you so much. do not be an accomplice to all the corruptions. by the way, we vote. you are here to serve us. that is what we pay you for, so listen carefully. thank you. president chiu: next speaker. >> good evening, supervisors. i am with the golden gateway tenant association. our members live in a residential rental complex of

1254 units located across the street from the proposed construction sites. our association opposes be project. a parking garage will increase traffic congestion at the bottleneck or washington street feeds into the embarcadero. it is contrary to the city's transit first policy. there will be traffic congestion, especially during the seven months of excavation. the noise will be earsplitting for most residents, especially in the 440-unit building 60 feet away. this project proposes the first height increase on the northern waterfront in 45 years and will

set a precedent for other developers. you did it for them, why won't you do it for me? the result could be a concrete curtain along the waterfront. please vote no on the 8 washington street plan. thank you. president chiu: next speaker. >> good evening. i am with the san francisco tenants union. on items 8 and 12, the eir is flawed. i will try to give 25 years of my personal experience in 90 seconds. i moved in in 1987 as a starting student. i had been practicing law, but i went back to the it mightmba. -- my mba. i moved into the golden gateway

25 years ago. after that, i started to organize with the tenants' association. i was the president of the association a few times. i can confirm that by the time i moved out last year, flanking both sides of my apartments were empty hotel units. the one i vacated is forming a bloc of convenient hotel alternatives. i did not know that the landlord was engaging in a questionable tax strategy. one thing i have seen before, i got a real education by looking at the developers on the prior project proposals. one of the things i learned, you see how labor states and a lot of people make their pay whether the project goes forward or not. but i learned something about the planning fiasco is co, a wall of condos.

now you see it, now you don't. it is very easy to look at a community plan that honors the planning principles in reality. the developer might say that times have changed. in many ways, they have. we now know better. we note what is going on here and we really should not miss our opportunity to do the right thing. supervisor mar: i want to ask about the two units on the other side of you. they were turned into hotel units? could you explain who you think owned them and what the rest -- what the rents owere? >> i would see the holiday littered with the notices. they would be -- i would see the hallway littered with the notices. they were supposed to be providing security for the

complex is. -- for the complex. these notices said things like check out time, leave the keys on the counter. sometimes it included a bill. people were rarely there. the organization that seemed to be renting them seemed to be abrogating actual tenants for less than 30 days. -- abrogating actual tenants for less than 30 days. one of the companies was bay city suites. there was at least one company involved to in these hotel alternatives for people visiting on business. we know that hurts the hotel tax fund. it hurts grants for the arts,

which hurts the cultural life of san francisco. it is completely intolerable. the landlords who is now one of the partners has the knowledge that this is going 9. finally, they are acknowledging publicly, they are admitting what they have always known because they advertise it online. they have always known that this is going 9. they denied it, but now they are acknowledging that this has been going on. wire report this landlord? it was horrendous. -- why reward this landlord? it was tremendous. i had neighbors once upon a time. i worked with seniors and families for 24 years. the only reason -- i loved the community. i think it is a great community. i think you have for a lot of wonderful voice is rising in civic spirit. i am happy that i am not paying

your rent check to a landlord that has a questionable tax dodge strategy. president chiu: thank you. next speaker. if there are any other members of the public who would like to speak, please line up now. >> good evening, supervisors. i am the former president of the telegraph hill dwellers. we are here before you today on a very important issue. we were not an appellant, we stand in solidarity with our neighbors. with everyone you have heard from today to tell you that this eir cannot be certified. the spot zoning issue. you are being asked to amend your zoning map to allow for one project. this is unprecedented. the last time this issue came

before this body it was 555 washington, and it was unanimously voted down. on that premise alone, the eir is flawed. you must look at what you are voting for and what president this sets. -- precedent thissets. the analysis is flawed. there is no rationale, except to build a lot of luxury condos and sell a lot of condos. 2.5, $7.5 million prices. i was very discouraged to read an article saying that this a vote is done. i cannot believe that. i know this body is taking into consideration all the evidence before it. any man can go into battle when he is sure of winning.

give me the man would be plucked to go into a battle he is sure of losing. this board must consider all the evidence, especially on the spot zoning issue. the 66-year resident trial attorney that could not finish his thoughts, he was talking about supervisors for open space. if you are for open space, you cannot be for this eir. [applause] president chiu: thank you, next speaker. >> i am representing the tenants' association at 88 howard. i am an over 20-year resident of that area. i have some system and comments. i think this is too big, too close to the water, i live right next to the hotel. it is already on the present on the waterfront. this is going to be even worse.

the fact that this is public land that is going to be sold as luxury condos, it goes against the grain of san francisco. i walked on the embarcadero significantly. the shadowing from this is going to be absolutely awful. the sun always sets in the west. it will be terrible. i want to echo the former mayor's comments. we were lucky to lose the embarcadero freeway from that earthquake. this is a return back to just destroying it. thank you. president chiu: are there any other members of the public who wish to speak? ok. why don't we go to the planning department for your presentation? you have 20 minutes. >> good evening, supervisors. i am the manager of legislative affairs for the planning

department. i am joined by our chief environmental review officer, senior planner, and project planner. i would like to take a moment to note that there are some ordinances that are related to this project that will not be enacted by any action you could take tonight. if the board chooses to certify the eir and asia the conditional use authorization, -- and issue the conditional use authorization, you will year later -- you will hear later amendments. we would be happy to provide additional information if you have any questions. we begin first with the appeal of response. >> good afternoon. can you hear me through the microphone if i'm standing?

good afternoon or good evening. i am with the planning department. i will make a few introductory comments. i will apologize in advance, i will jump around and address some of the dishes as i was writing them down. -- some of the issues as i was writing them down. almost all the comments have already been addressed and the package we have provided in writing. i will not address everything. a couple introductory comments, the eir certification, it is not a project approval action. it is an informational document only. talking about the environmental impacts that could result from the project, ways to reduce or avoid those impacts. a vote to certify the eir does

not bind you in any way in terms of a subsequent vote on the project. if you vote to certify its, you believe the eir is a sufficient informational document and the information is accurate and it comes to appropriate conclusions supported by substantial evidence. one other general comment i want to make, this is obviously a controversial project. there is a lot of disagreement. controversy about the project approval, the information in the eir. with respect to the eir, the principal role is to disclose it. the eir does not need to resolve those disagreements, but we do need to inform the decision makers about them. as i indicated earlier, we need to come to appropriate conclusions with regard to ceqa

impacts. getting to some of the specific comments. i was gone to address this in more detail, whether the public trust document allows for this project to proceed. i agree with her. this is an issue to be discussed later. i want to make the point, we have discussed this with our city attorney's. we are very confident that this project -- the trust has been removed. it was not barred by the state constitution. the land commission agreed. this is not technically a seek what impact issue. it is an approval issue. -- ceqa impact issue. questions raised about cumulative traffic and parking

impacts. the eir -- and very specifically talks about and analyzes the impacts from other projects. such as the cruise terminal as well as incorporating a general background. all the impact analysis in regards to transportation parking impacts to take into account that cumulative analysis. the appellant and others have raised the issue of 75 howard. does produce came to place subsequent to -- those projects came to place subsequent to the eir being published. it is not a new project. it is relocating across the street and down the block. traffic is already incorporated into the analysis.

that project was a cart -- was a part of our current setting. 75 howard is further removed part of the background growth, which is included in the project impact analysis. on parking impacts, both of those projects are outside the study area. what happens to the parking there does not change the information or the analysis presented in the eir. it was not part of the survey area. the issue was raised with regard to the golden gateway eir from the 1970's. we did not address those in our eir and we did not believe that is relevant information. this eir is obligated to report on the impacts of this proposed project. the 8 washington street proposal