and make their voices heard. i will move on to item 57 and item 58. >> she has made a motion. any further discussion, or can we take a roll-call vote hamas and -- a roll-call vote bowma >> [calling votes] bewe have 10 ayes. >> the eir is approved.

the you have any additional comments? i think this is the time to discuss additional amendments that might be made. supervisor kim: i do have some comments. i want to acknowledge it is 10:00, so i will try to keep it brief. i get to come in on the tail of a project that has been in involvement for 14 years. there are many supervisors that have been involved. i want to comment on some of the highlights. this is not dissimilar from the same development plan approved last year.

some things i am very proud of is the highest number of housing units. we are talking about 435 housing units. this included homeless and formerly homeless individuals. 300 acres of space include some of the highest efforts in terms of hiring, so 50% local hires. some of the changes we have seen are the lowered he eighthights and traffic mitigation.

i know another one will be introduced and one that has less commercial property, so i think we have a plan. there was one concern, which is how we are financing this project with the uncertain future we aren't now developing. -- we are developing. and one thing we have lost is important to me. we are able to amend legislation of the state level, which would allow us to build up to 400.

in the case that may not happen, i am introducing an amendment that has been approved by the developer as well. i would like to add the language to section 9.2, which guarantees an increase in affordable housing on the island, even if the changes are not made i stayed level -- at state level. we still ally of -- still allow an increase of 30%. i believe we have passed around this amendment. i want to thank the mayor's office and also the laborers. we have said benchmarks for

local hires curiosa -- local hires. i am recommending we insure the service contract for ground maintenance and landscaping and that service providers also provided job enhancement for those employed. we have one amendment that has already gone through, and i know president shoe has one more amendment -- president chiu has one more amendment. >> last year, we passed the initial approvals and framework of this project, and we did that

unanimously and i think it is appropriate that we also have such a vote. i have a couple of amendments i would like to make to clarify our commitment to public transportation. we are striving to move toward a transit first city, and there are many things that are outstanding. we are building a ferry terminal. we are going to be concluding that the developer is committing to a $30 million operating subsidy superior -- subsidy. 1/3 of all trips are taken by transit. the goal is to have 44% of trips done by transit.

i would like to shoot for a 50% goal of heat our trips on public transit. i would like to have an amendment to create an additional transportation subsidy paid for by the developer if it is less than 50%, so we are going to see how we have done in terms of meeting our goals, making sure transit is really used iron visitors and if we are not meeting those goals and -- used by visitors, and if we are not meeting those goals, there will be required to invest $5 million to continue to move in the right direction. i am also introducing a separate amendment to address the fact of the costs of projects are often

driven up while sequence delays -- cequa delays may be involved. i am asking to insure a guarantee if there is a delay. >> in the dda, the section relates to corporate guarantees for financial obligation of the developer. the guarantee would be $5 million, and it would increase to $10 million after the proceedings are done, and that would be when most of the financial obligations would begin.

>> out is what i would like to offer. >> do we have a motion that includes the amendments by supervisor camkim? >> i have one more amendment. i would like to add to the document which establishes a process for the allocation of additional increments, which is what we are working on right now, and the language is also before my colleagues. >> have made changes as your amendment include -- how many changes as your amendment now include now? >> 3. >> we have a motion on who include the three changes outlined. we have a motion and a second.

the you what to speak on this? >> i had a separate amendment i wanted to bad if we are considering these together. this would be an amendment to item number 10, and this has to do with ensuring the historic preservation commission for ensuring they advised. i would like to read into the record that it would save the histic preservation commission language be added to the design document inc. establishing a special use district and they shall not

approve without first consulting with a qualified architectural planner or other planner. it says the preservation specialist or if no such person exists, a third specialist. after the proposed project compliance for rehabilitation. they may forward it for review. that has been looked at by our city attorney as well. this would be an amendment to number 10. >> can we take those together? we have a motion. supervisor wiener: haidas have two questions about the

amendment. -- i just have to questions about the amendment. the phrase was historic rehabilitation. i cannot recall. >> i would like you to describe the definition of fat. -- of that. >> my other thing is that this specifically refers to the secretary of interior, and i cannot recall whether those standards are inc. in san francisco's statutory of law or elsewhere. those are high standards that may or may not always be appropriate for urban settings, and i am curious to know if that is true elsewhere.

>> on treasure island, there are a number of national registry buildings. all of these are within the trust area, so they fall within jurisdiction of those resources. there is a resolution that says they are looking at use and that mitigation measures set out a performance standard they must follow. in the design for development, it is a procedural development, and currently, they are required to consult with historic resources experts about these

standards. the amendment would specify the historic resources experts would be the planning department and the city staff and that acred -- they could seek input but they need not do it. >> it would apply to what kinds of projects in treasure island? >> it would have not applied to any project. a -- it would apply to any project. >> it would require the application, and my question is do we do about elsewhere by ordinance. >> but is a general standard the city typically will follow in terms of its analysis as well as

when we analyze projects that might alter it resources. goo>> there is a debate because standards are high, and there are people who believe there should be on modification. my question is are there other aspects that mandate application of standards? >> i have been informed by the historic resources experts but the planning code does not contain a requirement following standards, but of the commission has adopted it as a rule in terms of their view of projects

in jurisdiction. >> i would request that the amendment be separated. >> why don't we do that thelma -- why don't we do that? colleagues, can we take those amendments without objection? those are for the underlying documents, items 14 through 59. with respect to the motion, is there a second? can we have our role call on that motion. >> [calling vote ss]

supervisor chu: no. supervisor cohen: no. supervisor farrell: no. supervisor wiener: no. we have 7 ayes, and 4 nos. >> the motion passes. >> i understand there are still amendments that need to be made

to the items 10, 11, and 17. those have been circulated. can we take a roll-call vote? can we take those amendments without objection? at this time, if we could take a roll call vote on the entire package of legislation, items 8 through 17 as well as item 59.

>> if i could make a final comment, because i want to acknowledge the 14 years of work that went into this, and i want to recognize people who really worked for years on this project. but i want to recognize cherie williams. [applause] many organizations -- mercy, boys and girls condlub, and of course our partners for advocating for this project. i want to thank you for the work you have done. there is a lot that comes with this development, but most important is the 240 units coming down the pipeline, and i think that is a great seat, and

i am happy to be part of the project that has tons of community input and that i hope weekend reading and we can replicate. >> -- and we can replicate. i was just reminded that supervisor campeau's stepped out. i would like to out of we rescind the vote so we can vote unanimously. -- to ask you to increase in the vote so we can vote unanimously. now if we can take a roll-call vote. [calling votes] >> it is approved unanimously.

[applause] one final vote on items 8 through 17 and item 59 as amended, a package that will approve. [calling votes] >> we have 11 ayes. >> the ordinance this adopted

superior -- the ordinance is adopted. [applause] we are not done yet, so we are done with treasure island but not done with the rest of the meeting. why don't we recess for five minister -- 5 minutes in?

>> will combine to the board of