8 Washington condo project loses big in S.F.

Erich Pearson (left) hugs Aaron Peskin at a party celebrating the rejection of Props. B and C. Erich Pearson (left) hugs Aaron Peskin at a party celebrating the rejection of Props. B and C. Photo: Carlos Avila Gonzalez, The Chronicle Photo: Carlos Avila Gonzalez, The Chronicle Image 1 of / 28 Caption Close 8 Washington condo project loses big in S.F. 1 / 28 Back to Gallery

Voters on Tuesday overwhelmingly rejected a referendum that would have allowed construction of a high-rise waterfront residential development, forcing the developers to rethink or redesign their plans to build 134 luxury condominiums along the Embarcadero.

By voting "no" on Proposition C, voters overturned the Board of Supervisors' June 2012 decision to grant the 8 Washington project an exemption from the city's existing 84-foot waterfront height limit. The board's ordinance would have allowed the development to rise to a height of 136 feet.

Proposition B, a companion measure that also would have allowed the condo development to go forward, also was beaten handily.

"The people of San Francisco are smart," said Jon Golinger, who ran the campaign against the 8 Washington project. "They heard claims about how the project would bring new parkland, but when they saw that the Sierra Club and the local Democratic Party were opposed, they took a second look."

Both measures fell far behind as soon as the vote-by-mail tallies were released shortly before 8:30 p.m. and continued to fall further behind as the ballots from the polling places were counted. With 100 percent of the vote counted, the no vote for Measure B was 62 percent. For Measure C, the no vote was 66.5 percent.

The vote ends, at least for now, a seven-year struggle to develop the 3.2-acre site, which is made up of a surface parking lot owned by the Port of San Francisco and a private swim and tennis club that has agreed to sell its property to developer Simon Snellgrove and his Pacific Waterfront Partners.

The effort, which included community meetings, long discussions with representatives of the port and the city, an environmental impact report and heated hearings before the City Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, was capped in June 2012 when the board approved the 8 Washington project on an 8-3 vote, with Supervisors David Chiu, John Avalos and David Campos opposed.

But opponents of the project, most of them neighbors of the proposed development, went to the streets and collected more than 31,000 signatures to get a referendum on the ballot, challenging the board's decision.

The effort "shows just how effective a citizens coalition working together for a waterfront they care deeply about can be," Golinger said at the time.

Opponents complained about the condominium development's proposed 327-space underground parking lot, the loss of the athletic club and the price of the new units, which they said could sell for as much as $5 million each.

But it was the height of the project that caused the most consternation. The blueprints call for five- or six-story buildings along the Embarcadero, with buildings behind them on Drumm Street rising to the full 136-foot height limit.

Calling the project a "wall on the waterfront," opponents of the development, working with environmental groups and neighborhood organizations, charged it was the first step toward turning the city's waterfront into an exclusive haven for the wealthy, with high-rises lining the Embarcadero.

"Do you want a San Francisco waterfront that looks like Miami Beach?" former City Attorney Louise Renne, a leader of the effort against Props. B and C, wrote in a campaign mailer.

Supporters of the project, including Mayor Ed Lee, former Mayor Gavin Newsom, city planning groups and construction trade unions, argued that the deal worked out with the developer not only would replace the existing parking lot and fenced-off athletic club with a modern development that has public open space and ground-level shops and restaurants, but also provide the city and the port with much-needed money for other projects.

Those benefits, city Controller Ben Rosenfield wrote in the ballot pamphlet, include $11 million for San Francisco's affordable housing fund, almost $12 million in near-term revenue and millions more in annual revenue over the coming years.