hearing none, let's go to the golden gate park. >> ok. >> so the first proposal there, we have already made the change in the southeast corner, and that is a base move. that is cool. so starting by mclaren lodge, a and a and -- south of kennedy and the west of the line. a at -- a broader proposal to

see where we are before we begin the more fine division of the park, so the proposal on the table is to divide the park. miss sidwell? -- tidwell? the proposal is where they will talk about dividing the park at all. >> i think i am ok with where i currently stand. >> mr. schreiber, mr. pilpel,

mr. leigh, mr. alonso. ok. mr. pilpel. >> back to where we are, in the block to the west as well. this is with me haight and inner sunset. the big rack. the children's playground carousel.

the tennis courts. but there probably are a couple of other things, but, yes, they are a major feature. this is reasonable. a little odd to look at, but i am wondering if there is any population in this highlighted area. a at -- the deviation of district 5 would be 1.3%. it would be -4.99%. >> i so propose.

>> thank you. mr. mr. leigh, mr. alonso. [reading names] who did i leave out? ok. ok, phase two, and i am not as supportive of this, but i am thinking about this on the west side, north of four. select certain blocks, so starting at 19th and lincoln /crossover. north of there. south of their headed west.

yes? yes? keep going. and let's try that for a moment, and then we can talk about it. these are the areas just inside the park on the south, and it seems to me that this is in an interest, and this does not include the polo field. not even south lake. there you go. rock and roll. >> mr. pilpel, this would be moving from district 1 to four. >> correct. >> miss tidwell, ms. mondejar,

and members? >> i do not think is splitting apart in three different districts -- >> i have less concern. this is more of an impact in connection. and the need for the involvement of the supervisor. >> i am not opposed to having its supervisors. i think it makes this very neighborly. >> ms. melara?

>> no. after hearing public testimony, i am against it. >> mr. leigh? >> also know. what i remember from public testimony is one or more of the individuals that we heard from that represent parks or that are involved with institutions that are in some ways community shepherds of the park, i believe they expressed support for the eastern part of the parked being shared with district 5, but i do not recall any similar testimony regarding the southern and western part with district four, so as other folks have said come on and going to say no. >> mr. alonso? >> i am going to say no, because

even though i live right there, i am going to say that i think two supervisors is more than adequate for the park. that should be fine. >> mr. mcdonnell? >> i say no for the same reasons. i am actually opposed to splitting the park at all. >> so we will not make this change. >> thank you. >> i thought the eastern side had more merit. thank you very much. >> thank you, sir. are there any other non population based? >> yes. i had, i was wondering if we could consider moving all of the uc campus into district 5 and keep it together. initially, i had suggested district 7, but it looks like more of district 5 once it, so i would propose doing that.

>> could you please highlight that? >> it is, the borders are? drive, clarendon and up. all of the way to parnassus. >> do we know if there is student housing or graduate student housing? it is within a region highlighted? >> the population. >> in the highlighted area, there is a population of 405. would you like to know the resulting deviation? >> yes. >> 2.69% for district 5.

for district 7 -0.84%. >> ok. i will propose that. >> thank you. mr. alonso? >> yes. >> mr. leigh? >> no. >> ms. lam? >> yes. >> ms mondejar? >> i thought this was about a non population moved. >> that is correct. you are tracking correctly. [laughter] >> so for now, i will say no. >> ok. mr. pilpel? >> no. i think this potentially affects the woods area, and we have heard some testimony on that. i hadn't and seven previous meetings to put all of this

into five, and i explained before the road that is not there, so i am not with doing this at this time. i am sorry. >> thank you. mr. schrieber? >> no. >> i am actually leaning towards yes. i was trying to clarify, so i am actually going to say yes, based that this does not really encroach on the area. yes. >> excuse me. so it is -- --

>> can we just overlay public testimony? i think the council submitted boundaries. i am sorry. do you guys set boundaries for that amount? >> no, i do not think we do. >> and do we have the council met but they submitted in the entirety? >> i believe that we have one large, like one large layer for that. >> yes. please? >> this is not in the individual neighborhoods, is that fine?

>> christine, you know? >> did that persuade you one way or another, mr. pilpel? >> no, not yet, but i am waiting. >> this would be west of twin peaks. >> and can we highlight again what was suggested? >> would you please repeat what that was? >> it was the campus which would be there between clarendon, christopher drive, claremont, all of the way to parnassus. >> thank you. >> can i just ask them? >> yes, mr. pilpel? >> to john stone, what is the other corner there?

the southeast corner of the highlighted area, clarendon and johnstone? the northwest corner is judah? south of there, , is that correct? can you just walk me through getting from their along the south? what are those named streets, or how do you describe that, is what i'm trying to figure out. >> and then christopher. >> uh-huh. >> that is on the other side. >> that is crest mont. that is the cabinet. >> ok.

and i guess my problem with this is not in describing it, crestmont and some point there, and it is to a point north, at fourth, it becomes very difficult to describe. >> difficult for whom? >> to the consultants, the lawyers, you know? rather than speak for them, consultants, would this be difficult to describe? >> it looks straightforward with the id tool. >> it certainly is a census block, no question, but the streets do not connect, so in terms of describing it, crestmont drive does not get to fourth and kirkum. >> i understand, and you just said it was difficult to describe. >> and i am just wondering.

>> we can work with that. there may be some descriptions in the law that allowed geographical ordinance. >> all right, i am still not convinced, but they do. >> sure. >> yes, you can. ms. lam? >> in reviewing it again, i would say no. >> ok, we will not make this change. any other non population? the last question notwithstanding. any other non population or related proposals? >> i would like seeing this go

to 13 with that little hanging thing there north of alameda. >> this, right here? >> so much better. thank you. a little things. >> is this the area you had envisioned? >> yes. this is the division. >> thank you. >> 6. >> i suppose. >> a population of six with the resulting deviation? >> the deviation would be -0.9%, and a deviation for the st. 6 whitby 0.86%.

>> [reading names] >> i just wanted to point out that there are six people there, so that is population. i just wanted to keep us on track, and i am going to vote yes. >> be highlighted area going into 10 or 6? >> going into 10. >> yes. >> please make this change. can you zoom in on that corner? the tip of what we just did, please? i just want to see that that is not straight. >> i knew you were. [laughter] >> anyone other than mr. pilpel? any other non population-related

proposals? put it on speaker. [laughter] someone watching just saw something they did not like. all right, mr. pilpel? so the other big move that is not -- it is all relative. to chaves and potrero for a moment. from potrero, i would like to not have that little triangle doing that thing and end up on bayshore, and then follow bayshore all of the way down to paul. i am not going to try what we did earlier.

like three. >> this is potrero we are at now. did you want to go up? >> yes. so this proof -- so this? >> the big point is between potrero and 280. rather than using that line, i would like to use bayshore. >> one moment. ok. >> that is the big concept. >> ok. i see.

>> mourn moment, please. >> so far, we have three people. -- one moment, please. >> so far, we have three people. >> we will get to a general direction, but i would generally conform to this. >> those are the boundaries. >> i understand, a and so this

is -- my >> that is four people. >> there are other things to clear up. there you go. no change in deviation. >> the deviation for district 10 would be -0.91%. >> i think it makes it

straighter. but -- >> no. >> neighborhood boundaries. >> like bernal, for example? >> yes. >> this shows the freeway as the eastern boundary, and we can

also look at the planning neighborhoods. the plan in neighborhoods also showed the freeway. >> we did not get another submission for that area. >> thank you. one more time with the new information. mr. alonso? >> yes. >> mr. leigh? [reading names] >> i will say yes, but there is a population here, just because there is population there. to get it on record. >> get it on the record that there is population. [reading names] please make this change.

and if i can make this so it is a sweeping curve? >> that is a population of six people. the mine is on bayshore. >> take that line out. >> that adds 20 people. >> really? well, if that really is east, if that really would put a mine at bayshore to the folks that there are folks on eastside of bay shore, they really ought to be there. >> that is one point of view. >> ok. >> would you like to hear the deviation? >> yes, please. >> both of these have a population of 26. the district 10 deviation would be -0.87%, and the deviation for district 9 would be 4.81%. >> thank you.

ms. mondejar? just for the record, there are people there. we were supposed to do no population. >> i actually agree. i think we are doing a lot of things that we were not going to do, and i think we should move on to other items. >> that point is well made. is that a no? >> no. >> mr. leigh? mr. alonso? mr. schreiber? miss tidwell? >> yes. >> please make this change.

>> i do not have anymore, unless you want to walk through prove >> ms. tidwell? >> i just had a question on holiday plaza. if you could read the boundaries of that.

the holiday plaza and cable car turnaround. >> there are 50 people on that? >> i would support putting that in three? >> the deviation is -- >> thank you. mr. schreiber? ms. mondejar? >> can i ask why you are doing

this? >> that is the neighborhood. >> there is population there, so note. >> ms. lam? >> however we can add population, so, yes. >> ms. melara, mr. alonso? please make this change. >> point of order, we keep on doing what we are not supposed to do, and we have other items on the agenda, and i would love to do those, because i would like to get it tomorrow and not be tired.