fences. if you green light this thing, the public, everyone gets to benefit from the open space. the children's playground, and a much better pedestrian experience, so i urge your support. >> thank you. -- chair mar: next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is richard. i have lived in san francisco since 1982, first on telegraph hill and then mostly on russian hill. i am chair of the russian hill design committee, and i currently sent on the board as an adviser currently. i am sure you are all aware that the proposal has gone through much process and scrutiny. i think we can aceves, and this

is as it should be. these waterfront sites are very precious to our city. i want to thank all of the city department personnel and officials who work with the developer to make project as stellar as it has become. the committee met with both the developer, the san francisco waterfront partners, and with the opponents. when we first looked at the developers' proposal, it was with great skepticism. historically, there has been a great deal of concern, especially since there was the removal of the freeway. those that are easy to embrace include the surface parking lot in favor of much better land use and especially the reduction. both the committee and board levels. my understanding is that this

site is currently zoned for buildings 84 feet high and that the developer can build. if they can consider this in this regard, i believe we can all see that providing a better transition from a much taller existing buildings makes great sense at this unique location. the concept of stepping down towards the embarcadero has long been promoted. in one sense, this would mimic the contour of the hills that defines san francisco. this would be some fear -- superior aesthetically. chair mar: thank you so much. next speaker. >> can we get this on the overhead, please? chair mar: yes. it should be there in a moment. >> that afternoon. dave barnett. i have been a 30-year resident

of the neighborhood. everything involves trade-offs, and while you are dealing with the height situations, supervisor chiu mentioned the streets and their wits -- widths, and this is basically an four-lane street with a divider. another is a four lane approaching north. it becomes two lanes in front of the golden gateway property, and one of the things that we have is the entire situation. this disposes of all of our garbage. we have 1200, refuse trucks and that sort of thing. the other thing is that the northbound street is used when the embarcadero is closed. now, the developer is proposed

janeiro washington street by 11 feet by taking out this center divider, which i frankly think is quite attractive, and the other thing is once that is done, the garage entrance and exit will be on this corner, and people will want to make a left- hand turns to go on to the embarcadero without going around the block. and we have two issues, the issue of the garbage collection and the activities. i think if you're going to grant an exception for height and bulk, it seems it might be appropriate to leave the streets the way they are, because they work quite well the way they are. chair mar: thank you. i have a couple of more cards. and i previously called a couple of other people.

those are all of the cards that i have. next speaker, please. come forward. it does not have to be in this order. >> hello, my name is irene, and i live on jackson street in san francisco. my objection to the project, well, there are many objections, but the thing that i am wondering about is that i thought lost 351 was under the trust forbade residential housing, and i am just wondering why there should be an exception to this, because we have many other seawall lots other than 351 that would be open to development, and if you make the exception for 8 washington

without a waterfront plan, for the seawall lots, what is to happen to our beautiful waterfront prove now, i know that there is a great deal of money involved, but that should not be the only consideration. if we give up plot to 351 without knowing more thinking what the future development will be, then we will lead a very -- leave a very sad legacy for austerity. thank you. chair mar: thank you. >> yes, i am jim chappell, an

urban planner, urban designer, with degrees in architecture and planning, and i have spent my entire career in this field, and let me just say i have no interest in this project. i have sat in the audience and of last dozen years as i never heard interests from a small group of people in uprose -- opposing this project. as a planner, urban designer, and public citizen interested for our city, there is no reason to not approve this and every reason to approve them. the existing uses for a buffer against a double decker embarcadero freeway and are totally appropriate for today's gracious embarcadero boulevard, and i would caution the board against redesigning and micromanaging every tiny detail of the project. you have one of the world's best designers, one of the

world's best landscape architects, and a developer with a terrific record all -- our waterfront. please do not try to redesign this project from the dais. that is a formula for failure. your highly qualified planning department and port staff have very competently presented the case today. the height limits, for instance, were set by the very public planning process. i will not repeat what they have said, but it is time to move on. please approve the zoning and general plan amendments and other findings and pass on to the full board with the unanimous vote of this committee today. commissioner torres: -- chair mar: thank you. next speaker. >> i thank you for the opportunity to speak. i am an urban planner and architect year. my office is at union with my

partner. suffer me to go and the heavily on credentials, because i belong to that old gang of the elderly urban planners in the city who -- way back into this subject. i think 8 washington's project has been eloquently described by others. i have this to support your approval of the project. from eight non parochial process, as chair of the city design committee and a member there of the 11 years as the arts commission for civic design. i consulted to the city planning department on the city's original design plan and served on a board of directors for eight years and currently on their advisory and project review committees.

i also served on the northeast waterfront citizens advisory committee at the time of the preparation and the hearings or the north east waterfront. for the rebuilding of the embarcadero roadway and its adjacent often port properties, that process of about five or six years was long argued, agreed upon, codify, and is in the record. the project before you express's the city and port goals. i have a good deal more i can go into, but i think my time will run out. my parochial northeast credentials are being president twice, and i strongly disagree with their current position before you on the matter. as an affordable housing advocates, i have tried for a number of years to find colleague investors for the program and was unable to do so. chair mar: thank you very much

for comments. next speaker? >> supervisors, i am president of the jackson square association, and i represent the residence, the merchants, and others in jackson square. we very much support this project. we especially liked the fact that there is a trade-off. this is what the whole communities will benefit from. this is especially for the merchants in the area. we think that overall it is a win/win situation, for the city and for the arts community.

we hope you support the project. chair mar: thank you. it looks like this is the last speaker. >> party. i am charles. i am speaking on a narrow issue, which i think everyone agrees with, actually. the there are always trade-offs in medicine. obviously, the public will lose if the project goes ahead with certain things. the private sector will gain many things. we would have a replacement pool. there is no guarantee that anything will be built, for what is set aside for the pool area.

they would not be restricted to recreational use. there is nothing there. this is really a quite lovely design. this is to gain some support. i do not think at this juncture having both the eir and common sense, and the people who swim at the pool, all of us are agreeing that we should have a replacement recreation facility, that you should pass on this to condition any approval you might make with regard to the design modifications, condition that on a restriction so that the remaining area, where millions on resale, so there is quite a bit to it. that this be restricted to mitigate the losses that the public will suffer.

chair mar: thank you. if there is any other speakers, come forward. ms. hester? >> sue hester. you have references to a number of things today. the waterfront design and access plan. both of these had environmental review. if it has any reference that has gone through environmental review that says this should be, they should provide it for you today. there have been a lot to the embarcadero study, and they did not want to have a study that

was not tested. by eliminating the median, that study is taken as gospel, even though it never went through environmental review. when did go through the environmental review is the downzoning of the golden gateway. 1972 to 1976. the city changed the height limit for the golden gate way because they had the unfortunate experience of the buildings that had already been built. this downplays everything that had not been built them 84 feet. there were two eir's for that, and you have no reference to that, in the northeast embarcadero steady or in this case report, nor by staff. this went under the rug, because that study found that those

over 84 feet have an adverse impact because they violate the urban design plan. that is in the record on this case. the planning department wants to adopt that issue. ask them about that. >> thank you. -- chair mar: thank you, ms. hester. >> as lee radiner spare you, eight hours at the last testimony, they have decided to focus their efforts. but a number of you did say in the first round that you're going to increase the affordable housing. we will like to see how you will make that happen. but a couple of things quickly, we have heard about the great design. i have to say the developer has

done some fabulous renderings. the video in the eir, you look along the edge, and this is what supervisor chiu was talking about earlier. and you put a 70-foot wall next to it, that is what it looks like. this is a very little common narrow sidewalk. you could not move that 5 feet. all it would do is to decrease the interior by 5 feet, but it would make for the kind of elegant prominent we all deserve -- elegant promenade we all deserve. the developer increase to this, but since then, it has shifted. this has gone for the first sale to the second sale.

this is the fate -- same thing you talked about. this is over two years, meaning that the city will never seen as these. chair mar: thank you. is there anything else that -- anyone else who like to speak? >> it is whether or not we are going to lose a view of a giant, tall, a defense and gain more for san franciscans. thank you.

chair mar: thank you. seeing no other public comment, we will close public comment. [gavel] we will begin with president cjiu -- chiu. president chiu: this is the democratic process and how we consider various land use decisions, and i want to thank everyone for caring so much, as you do, about the future of our waterfront and the future of our neighborhoods. i want to stay at the outset, and this is something that our constituents know. i have not opposed any or all development at this site. what i have had some debate

concerns about is about the height increase. the bulk increase. and if we as a body are going to be providing with these extraordinary land use bonuses, there ought to be some good reasons for this. it is no surprise at this moment that we do not necessarily see that, but i do hope that in coming days, at the finance committee or at the financial terms and next tuesday that we will be able to talk more about what is specifically appropriate here. that being said, i do understand a desire to move this forward and to call into question. colleagues, what i'd like to ask for this committee to do is to move this forward without recommendation, for several reasons. we have a committee on wednesday. we have just started to learn

about changes to financial terms. i am still waiting for information from the developer and waiting for information from the court here to see exactly what this entails. of course, during that time, i think it is inappropriate for deciding to move forward. i do know that there will be ongoing discussions about the various parties to see if there are better ways to resolve what we have here, if there are any changes that we need to be made. so with that, colleagues, i would like to ask for you to do that. chair mar: thank you. i would just like to thank everyone for coming to speak, including the ports and all of the people from the neighborhoods around the development that has come to speak, as well. i also wanted to say that i have been in close conversation with supervisors olague and kim, the very much care, like i do, about

working with the port and about affordable housing as a priority for us, but also, i think the parking spaces, the public parking spaces are another issue that we want to work to reduce the number of parking spaces perhaps by 20%, but we will continue to work with you. this open space is something that is a tremendous benefit to neighborhoods, in addition to the other benefits, but i wanted to make sure that we are addressing a number of issues that were brought up from around the area, and the last couple of items, i did mention that i am familiar with the swimming area currently in the golden gateway swim and tennis club, and i have been here with my daughter, and i do know that that is the space. that should be opened up for more public access, so i look

forward to more communication so that the public can have access to that, the aquatics, as well. and then there is much more money going to the public general fund. it is appreciated. i look forward to continuing to look at whether it is the budget analyst's report coming up, to look also at ways that the general fund is supported in the project. the last thing i want to say is that this is an upzoning, and i am looking at the foot print of what is being upzoned. this does seem to be in one corner of the lot, which scope'' downward, as well, which i appreciate the planning department with the excellent presentation that looks at the

sloping down from the higher heights of the golden gateway and the alcoa building. i look at where is the equity and where is the equitable approach. i look forward to making sure that we maximize this. so i will be supportive of the president's motion to move this forward with that recommendation. colleagues, if you have other comments? supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: thank you, and thank you to everyone who came out today. i would be supportive of moving it with or without a recommendation. what matters is where the boats are going to be at the board. it is not so much whether or not the committee put a label about with or without a recommendation. i will be willing to support putting it out without recommendation. chair mar: supervisor cohen?

thank you. cell, colleagues, can we move this forward with that recommendation? thank you. thank you, everyone. ms. miller, is there any other business before us? clerk miller: no, there are no other matters. chair mar: thank you. the meeting is adjourned. [gavel] captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org--

>> hello. you're watching the show that explores san francisco's love affair with food. there are at least 18 farmers markets in san francisco alone, providing fresh and affordable to year-round. this is a great resource that does not break the bank. to show just how easy it can be to do just that, we have come up with something called the

farmers' market challenge. we find someone who loves to cook, give them $20, and challenge them to create a delicious meal from ingredients found right here in the farmer's market. who did we find for today's challenge? >> today with regard to made a pot greater thanchapino. >> you only have $20 to spend. >> i know peter it is going to be tough, but i think i can do it. it is a san francisco classic. we are celebrating bay area food. we have nice beautiful plum tomatoes here. we have some beautiful fresh fish here. it will come together beautifully. >> many to cut out all this talk, and let's go shop. yeah. ♪ >> what makes your dish unique?

>> i like it spicy and smoky. i will take fresh italian tomatoes and the fresh seafood, and will bring them to other with some nice spoked paprika and some nice smoked jalapeno peppers. i am going to stew them up and get a nice savory, smoky, fishy, tomatoy, spicy broth. >> bring it on. how are you feeling? >> i feel good. i spent the $20 and have a few pennies less. i am going to go home and cook. i will text message u.n. is done. >> excellent and really looking forward to it. >> today we're going to make the san francisco classic dish invented by italian and portuguese fishermen. it'll be like a nice spaghetti sauce. then we will