wanted to suggest another block there. >> there is no population there. there is only buildings. >> i thought west there might be. is there population? >> this highlighted area has 164 people in it. it would bring the deviation to- point -- 4.9%. 2.37. the population of the selected area is 164 people. >> thank you. commissioner tidwell:. commissioner tidwell: can we zoom in a teeny bit more?

i will go with yes. commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner mondejar: yes. commissioner melara: no. commissioner leigh: no. commissioner alonso: yes. chairman mcdonnell: please make this change. >> what are the boundaries now for cathedral hill neighbors? i think we killed the whole thing that people want us to do. that is what is left in that little corner. >> this area?

that is geary to van ness to golf. that is the existing boundary. >> people came to testify before us and we made changes for people here every time they come to testify but we have forgotten about the people who came before the last one and that is what i am very concerned about, we keep going back and forth and we have gone back on our word. basically. chairman mcdonnell: we have agreed we can revisit our own decisions and we have not made a commitment to anyone. we have not come back -- gone back on our word. where we are now in the process is our highest priority which is population. all other interests from my point of view are secretary to

our population challenge. unfortunately, that is going to cause us to have to revisit or in other cases, not be able to accommodate public comment, no matter how strong the case might be. that said, per our list of south of st. luke's. 27th and duncan. >> is it still possible to suggest a couple more tweaks or smaller scale tweaks in this northern part? >> yes. >> one is a question, a population question about the block between lombard and greenwich, jones and leavenworth.

this is the northernmost of the three blocks we moved back to two. that is the block. >> that is the population of 202 people. it will bring the deviation for district 32 -3.3% and the deviation for district 22 - 1.59%. >> i would like to propose this in combination with living in the lake st. boundary on the west side from 25th to either 26 or 27, which never gives us the population needed to stay within 5% for district two. the right side is that this would allow the elementary school to remain in district 3, preserving its connection to the chinatown community of interest. recognizing it is commonly understood to be an institution

that is part of chinatown. >> let's take this first one. recognizing that is the potential, the next move is to the lake street corridor. >> can i ask what the percentages of district 1 are currently? >> the deviation? district 1 is under populated by 4.96%. >> folks were thinking about this move. let's go >> 4.96% 3 district to come out -4.91%. district 3, -4.01%. district 4, -0.98%. district 5, 2.73%.

-- -2.37%. district 6, 0.87%. district 7, -0.83% pettitte -- . district 9, -- district 8, 3.58%. >> district 9, 4.84%. district 10, -0.91%. district 11, 4.94%. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. >> could you repeat district for? >> -4.90. chairman mcdonnell: going back up to russian hill. can you give us the population of that highlighted area and deviation? >> that is a population of 202

people, bringing the deviation for district 3 to -3.70% and the deviation for destitute to - 0.519%. commissioner alonso: no. commissioner melara: come back to me. yes. commissioner melara: could you tell me what the boundaries are? >> lombard, greenwich, and leavenworth. chairman mcdomelara: did we have testimony around us? >> we've received from don -- predominantly on monday. commissioner melara: yes.

commissioner pilpel: yes. commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner tidwell: no. commissioner melara: yes, because of the school. i am concerned about the other things that need to be done. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. please make this change and let's move to the other part of lake. if we could see the population for the block between 25th and 26. lake and california. >> that block? it has a population of 333 people. >> i would propose we move that blocked. -- that block. >> the population -- the

deviation for district one would-be -4.1% and a deviation for district 2 would be -5.64%. >> we're close to the zone. commissioner alonso: friendly amendment? we go back to cathedral hill and see if there is any population left in that sliver of what the current boundaries are. the population and deviation? >> 277 people would bring the deviation for district 22 -4.81%

and a deviation for district 5 to 1.99%. >> i would so propose this. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. commissioner tidwell: no. commissioner schreiber: no. commissioner pilpel: no. commissioner mondejar: no. commissioner melara: no. vice-chair lam: no. chairman mcdonnell: thank you.

>> i was trying to complete or get closer to something that works. could we go back to the north panhandle area? could we look at population between cole, grove, s chraeder, and hayes? sorry, not those blocks, but the one block right there. >> that is a population of 176 people, bringing the deviation to 4.72% -- -4.70% for district 1.

slight change. this is a population of 176 people, it would bring the deviation for district 124 point -- -4.72% and the deviation for district 52 2.13%. >> we're getting real precise here. thinking would be to add to d1. i do not know of that works. something like that to allow the population for one man to to stay under 5% deviation. one and t garrido to stay under 5% deviation. -- one and two to stay under 5% deviation. commissioner schreiber: yes.

commissioner pilpel: yes. commissioner mondejar: yes. vice-chair lam: yes. no. >> no. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. please make this change. >> could we get the deviation for one in two -- and two? >> the deviation for district 1 is -4.70%, the deviation for district 2 is -5.19%. >> could we look at the block -- let's go to the west.

so this would be moving to 24th avenue. within that boundary to twenty- fourth. -- moving that boundary to twenty-fourth. >> that is 165 people, bringing the deviation for district 2t to -4.69% and [inaudible] >> i propose we move that blocked. -- block. commissioner alonso: no. vice-chair lam: yes. commissioner pilpel: yes. commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner tidwell: no. chairman mcdonnell: please make this change. >> i just realized something.

since we moved over to fifth avenue on the other side, if we left this one alone, it could go back to six. that is another way of doing it that would come closer to preserving the current boundaries. >> mr. leigh is proposing we reverse the action we just took. >> could we look at that block bounded by california and lake and see if it is near 165 population? i suspect it is more dense. >> that was a population of 200 people. >> population is 200. >> -2.69% and district 1 would be -5.21%.

>> can we take them together as a swap and see if that does it? >> no. >> district 2, deviation? >> -4.69%, district 1, -4.29%. commissioner alonso: no. commissioner mondejar: yes. commissioner melara: yes. commissioner tidwell: yes to the swap. chairman mcdonnell: please make this change. we will go to the -- population deviation? >> 165 people. the deviation for district 1 would be -4.99% and a deviation for district 2 would be -4.91%.

>> ok. commissioner alonso: no. commissioner melara: yes. vice-chair lam: yes. chairman mcdonnellcommissioner . commissioner schreiber: yes. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. please make this change. possible to move now? readiness to move? thank you. muffing then -- can we go back to the monterey and specifically

look at the conservatory that is outside of d7 and get it into d7 without upsetting the entire applecart? >> is currently out in the world -- we propose to put it in seven. the concern was to maybe not. >> we're concerned about putting a sunny side institution at of sunnyside into district 8. >> i do not believe it is the

spot. >> i believe is that block. >> this is the bloc that has the conservatory in it. ordered by monterey and -- bordered by monterey and condo. -- congo. >> the question of -- >> sunny side district. can you open that up for us?

>> this is from the sunny side neighborhood association website. defining their boundaries. >> the resolution is horrible. can you zoom in? vice-chair lam: can we get the current deviations for district 7 and 8? >> is that correct? >> >that is what i have. >> district 8, 3.58%.

>> the blocks east of the solid black . i would be cool with moving them from eight to seven. >> what are tehe blocks east of the current boundary. what is the population of those? >> this is the current boundary right here. which blocks would you like to have selected? >> east of baden. >> that block is west of baden, south of joost. -- east of baden, south of joost. the others in the light green

color. >> that is a population of 371 people. deviation for district 72 -3.2% and a deviation for district 8 to 3.07%. >> one more time. >> this is a population of 371 people. it would bring the deviation for district 7 to -3.2% and the deviation for district 8 to 3.07%. >> if you tell me the street boundaries of the highlighted area? >> the red highlighted area? that is joost, circular, hearst,

and baden. >> inside the current -- you do not have to answer. can you zoom in? that does not help with the streets.

>> the block no. -- north, is that joost?

>> the population would be 580. >> 7 would be 0.2% -- -0.02%. >> i would not propose that last blocked. >> can we deselect that block and can i suggest that move? >> would you like to hear the population for this area? that is rendered 71 people bringing the deviation for district 72 -0.32% and the deviation for district 82 to

[inaudible] >> let's take it one piece at a time. 371. d8 becomes their 3.87. 0.32. thank you. commissioner tidwell: yes. commissioner schreiber: could ask -- could i ask [inaudible] >>

commissioner leigh: no. chairman mcdonnell: yes. commissioner melara: yes. commissioner leigh: i thought we were talking about the possibility of putting the conservatory back in district 8. this is going the other way. i appreciate the boundaries of the neighborhood have been submitted and everything, but we have not had much conversation about this and it seems like it is quite late to be entertaining new proposals that could have a serious -- serious impact. this is sort of like glen park /sunnyside type zone. i am uncomfortable with not the general concept, that would have

been fine to discuss it in an earlier stage. given where we are to move this into out of district 8 into district 7, i am not comfortable with that. >> can i first line? >> you sure can. >> i thought we were talking about the conservatory, not the rest of the neighborhood. that is glen park, actually, yes. i would say no. i change my vote. >> i will start over. i lost my place. commissioner tidwell: yes. commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner pilpel: yes. commissioner mondejar: yes. vice-chair lam: yes. commissioner melara: no. commissioner leigh: no. commissioner alonso: no.

chairman mcdonnell: please make this change. >> can you go back in for a moment? >> eight? >> yes, please. commissioner leigh: could i also ask and ne -- that needle that goes down, circular, is there population there?