OFFICIAL BCNA NEWS

When the Barbary Coast Record last reported on the controversial 8 Washington project, the voters of San Francisco had overwhelmingly rejected an increase in allowable height for developer Simon Snellgrove’s luxury condo project.

That left open the option for Snellgrove to go back to the drawing board and attempt to build a project compliant with the existing 84-foot height for the various parcels involved.

But now, even that idea has been scuttled by a judge’s decision that threatens the whole idea of “land swaps” of Public Trust Seawall Lots.

On Jan. 21, Superior Court Judge James Robertson found that the California State Lands Commission improperly cited obscure provisions that allow it to avoid a full review under the California Environmental Quality Act for cases involving “settlement of a title or boundary problem” when it transferred Seawall Lot 351 to Snellgrove for his 8 Washington luxury condo project.

“The SLC in approving this exemption has acted contrary to the clear language of the statute,” Robertson wrote in his ruling, finding that property transfers are far more significant than rare cases involving contested property boundaries or titles.

Former San Francisco City Attorney Louise Renne, a key opponent of the 8 Washington project, was quoted in the SF Bay Guardian saying the commission has clearly been misusing this exemption and abusing its authority over “public trust” waterfront lands in order to expedite development proposals.

So what does all this mean? It means that the project—or any project involving Seawall Lot 351—will have to pass muster with full Environmental Impact Reports and a better rationale that a bogus claim of “contest property boundaries” before State land can be “swapped.”

At the same time, there are some indications that the California State Teachers’ Retirement System (CalSTRS) may be getting impatient with providing the funds to fight the battle to build Snellgrove’s inappropriate development for the mega-rich.

CalSTRS provided the funding for the Snellgrove’s Piers 1½ , 3 and 5, a financially successful project that has been hailed as a model for waterfront development. However, 8 Washington was not to be as successful an investment for CalSTRS. The partners in the project have reportedly invested $40 million so far.

But what should be built on the ugly parking lot known as Seawall Lot 351? An alternative development proposal was presented to the Northeast Waterfront Advisory Group (NEWAG) on Feb. 5. This “Vision Plan” was developed by Asian Neighborhood Design, and offered to the Planning Commission as a better way to develop all of the Seawall lots, rather than a one-at-a-time spot process.

But the Planners at City Hall ignored the ideas and continued to support Snellgrove’s 8 Washington project.

Now a second iteration of the “Vision Plan” is being presented to various governmental organizations. The Plan proposes “Public Trust” compliant uses of Seawall Lot 351. These could include a hotel, a bicycle emporium, a youth hostel, restaurants and retail.
Whether governmental agencies take this plan seriously remains to be seen.

​But with voter sentiment clearly against a development like 8 Washington, maybe local residents can fight City Hall.