exploratorium, or existing products. it does not address transitional needs nor what is required to excavate all of that dirt. 20,000 dump trucks, one every two minutes, digging into basin. let's talk about recreation. the golden gate tennis and swim club was developed by the sec francisco redevelopment agency to meet the needs of middle class residents in an area that has no recreation space. in 1994, just for history's sake, mayor feinstein urged the redevelopment agency to reject a similar kondo plan. to crowd a condominium tower would be regrettable, is what the mayor said. he pointed out the existing golden gateway was chosen

because "the provision of open space was a factor in that selection." this is the open space we will be getting rid of. my district has the least amount of open space in the city. one-third of the residents are seniors. most are middle class. this is contrary to what you have heard during the course of this discussion. we have a choice between 90,000 square feet of outdoor recreation space compared to 20,000 square feet of open space promised by the developer when the city gives the developer $5 million. we are destroying community and i am not sure for what reason. i'm going to quickly touch upon the technical reasons that we should reject this eir. the plan kept changing. it was not stable. the public needs to understand what we are voting on. you cannot say the tennis courts and common period and then take away the tennis courts. the fact the real alternatives

to what we are considering today were not considered, you have to consider real alternatives. you have to ask, why you have to ask why we but not want this project. why do we need 400 cars as opposed to 200 cars? the final shows this. it did not show any tax to include why this was not feasible. any and these reasons would be enough to reject it. you have more reasons than you can choose to do that. i have heard from many of the new that this is not ready for prime time. i understand the politics are intense. i appreciate that. we are in this job to make difficult decisions. i ask you to appreciate what i know as a supervisor.

this will irreparably destroyed iraq community. these are e-mails that you get. they are simply petition. to me, these are actual people, families, seniors who will be impacted. i am asking me to speak for our neighborhoods and to speak for the kind a san francisco i think we want to live them. i asked for reversal. >> a motion to approve item 10 and item 11 and table item #9. >> emotions remain. is there any discussion of that? seaman, a roll call? no, no, no, no, no, aye, aye,

aye, no, no. three ayes and 8 no. >> motion fails. >> thank you. i will move item #9 and table at december 10 and 11. >> they made a motion to approve this. is there a second? seconded by the supervisor cohen. >> aye, aye, aye, aye, aye, no,

no, no, aye, aye, aye. 8 8 ayes and 3 no. >> item is approved for the additional use. >> thank you. i would like to ask that we continue to see you for a number of reasons. it is a late hour. if we do not continue this matter, i do think there are a number of changes that whewe ned to be added. i know it is late. i do think it would make a bit more sense to consider this on another day. let me also get a couple of other reasons for the continuance. we have not yet considered the height spot zoning or other

legislation and land use which will happen on june the fourth. we have not considered the terms. we are being asked provide all sorts of oexceptions. i ask that we continue june the 12th so when they appear, we can consider all these at once. we can better understand why these entitlements are appropriate and know but that is the best possible deal. i will also say that i to understand that many of the do think there are some changes that need to be made. whether it be too tight, it to parking, recreation protections, i think it would make sense given the chance to understand that there the discussions we're having.

>> they may continuation. is there a second? >> second it. >> i have voted against confirmation. with the conditional yes, i will respectfully disagree with the approach. from my perspective, i believe that there are fundamental problems with this project. i think that the problems with a project that had been outlined by the appellants including the former city attorney point to the fact that this project cannot be needed.

it cannot be desirable. i do not think this is the kind of housing that needs to be prioritized by the city. i say that with a heavy heart. i'm very mindful of the very compelling points that have been made by our friends in labor. at the end of the day, and it has to be the right project for the city. i do not believe bet this project can get to the point where it is going to be the right project. i am prepared to vote against it a night ther -- tonight. i do not see where we get to the requirements or will be met by this. i think we should act tonight. >> thank you. >> thank you.

i would be supporting the motion to continue the conditional use. i have been very moved by a lot of testimony i have heard today from neighbors, partners, but it rarely from our partners and labor. it's i want to get there. i am close to being able to support this project. other afford to a discussion part of the early iran zoning on june 4. it is my hope that they will take back some of the feedback they heard. that is from the public and reconsider some of their plans for the development. of like the sponsor to take into consideration the transit goals and the impact of the loss of recreation. we have heard a lot of

discussion around that. >> that is where i am. i look forward to continuing this conversation. thank you. >> thank you. it's just a few comments. we have had a lot of testimony today and tonight. i am glad to shorten my comments. there a lot of issues that have been raised on a number of assets from building height to parking to public space. i want to address something that has me concerned for quite a while. relating to the tenants club, i remember going there as a child with the friends that live in the area. a. ni know a lot of families tht are there. the concern was how this would impact them. i certainly talking a lot about keeping families there.

in matters to me. i think it's a matter to all of us. also, i think a lot of information has not been gotten out there to a lot of the members. the fact that the bay club will be able to be used during this construction. the fact that there is more pull them there is now out. doubling of the indoor facilities. there will be a loss of tennis courts. as i have talked to many of my residence, the thing that i struggle with is what the government's role? what is government's role? isn't the role of the local government to come in and tell a private clomclub owner you canno your part because you're taking away a certain amount of tennis courts? i struggle with that.

if it is publicly, that is different. this is public development. this is an issue with their members. should the government is sticking our hands in there and say no to the entire project tax that is what i shall go with. ultimately i believe the answer is no. this is a club that will be much better going forward. i understand the loss of the tennis facilities. i do not think that is a regiorn to reject it deat. let's get those jobs moving.

>> i am not support a continuing for a number of reasons. i do feel like we have discussed this. the project has been discussed from a land use. i feel like they're are things that many of us will be doing behind the scenes. i still remain committed to trying to ensure this for the luxury units of $2 million a to $7 million. it is the amount that would be paid the same by any development. it is usually much less expensive. my understanding is the model we current news calculates this. it assumes that. my hope is that given the

developer is your requesting an additional 50 ft. height increase has additional stories for what most likely will be the most expensive unit. it brings in additional value to the project. if the developer decides not to provide this, they should be expected to contribute a fair level of amount for the affordable housing fees. i will be advocating for that. i think -- i have been mulling over the design study that involved a number of community based groups. initially, my impressions were of that a lot of the vision was promoting opposition in a

project that was much different. i see a lot of benefits from existing projects. the connecting of neighborhoods and creation of more public, open space. in addition to the other discussions of the initial one. my hope is that they look to consider the means and the wishes of the residents in the neighborhood. i'm going to do my best to continue advocating for less bulk and height and increased this. >> i support the comments. like you, i will continue to work with the developer to obtain some further

medications, especially as it relates to parking. i do believe there is an excessive amount of parking. also as it relates to affordable housing. i refer to them as medications. lecky, i think this is something we can continue. i support you and your efforts. >> i just want to mention one thing on the record which i have stated now.

this impacts planning unit developments. one of the criteria for whether we would support a conditional use is the following under section 304 that states explicitly under no circumstances shelf height limits be accepted unless the exception is authorized by the terms of the code. even if we were to vote, it does not actually go into affect until after june the 12th. i am just mentioning that. people wonder if it will have an impact. it does not. they can continue at the meeting they have. there is nothing that we would be delaying with the continuance.

nothing in the planning code would be affected. i would ask those to support a mission. >> i think it gives us a good avenue to get more for affordable housing. i think it is a good tool that we can use to move forward. i am hoping it can do this together. >> one thing i forgot to note with respect to the issue besides the one i outline, one of the things i found compelling was the testimony from workers about the finality of trying to figure out what is going to happen here. i understand the substance will come to us. hopefully they'll have an

opportunity to change that. i think that some white you have to cut it. that is my reasoning behind it. >> no, no, no, no, aye, aye, no, aye, no, aye, no 4 ayes and 7 no. >> motion to continue is defeated. >> i do not want to belabor this matter any more.

i was contemplating asking you to vote on a number of amendments. i have heard by their three you directly or indirectly through folks who have been working on this that many of us who are sitting here still have concerns about the project. i would ask folks to think about what is important to see in this project, whether it be affordable housing. whether it be reducing heights. whether it be dealing with parking. we have focused on this for the first tieme. i ask you to take this obligation very serious for all the folks who have a lot of stake in this. >> thank you. i want to thank the supervisor for all these tiny have put into this. i know this has been an

incredibly different process here in i do not envy you. i will be supporting the conditional use tonight. how did touch on two topics. i want to second the remarks. and mentioned this in my questioning. this is the most personal for a lot of people. this is the impact it has had on our day-to-day life. it is difficult talking to people who of the members of this club.

i want to make some remarks about some of the attacks on this project. they have a lot of opinions about what they should be. i do not know whether it is smile or be a little bit annoyed, but when i hear people talk about the need for middle class housing, i recall that i held this. there were a lot of people from affordable housing who showed up in demonized me for having the gall to call a hearing. some of the same people who were either absolutely oppose,

thought it was the worst thing ever or were silent on that are now the champions of middle- class help when it comes to this. let's be real. when it comes to moderate-income housing, this is not about middle and modern housing. we're going to be serious about our work force. it will allow people to do renovations. there are not wealthy enough to stay here. it is about our zoning. it is not just about huge units. it is about a city wide approach to how we approach housing. i just ask people to not use that particular argument.

if we're serious about middle- class housing, we need to put our money where our mouth is all the time and not just when it is convenient. project. supervisor chu: i haven't -- listen to a lot of comments and i appreciate the conversation we have had a. we have not yet spoken about the financing district that will be created and that is something i look forward to discussing. so, i wanted to say i appreciate the people who have come out to speak to us on this issue. i know it is difficult. i appreciate supervisor cohen of farrell's comments. i think people have the misconception that it will not be that way any longer. that is not the case. i look forward to talking about

the financial components in the june hearing. supervisor wiener: i will move - 13 and table items 14 and 15. president chiu: tabling items 14 and 15. is there a second? seeing no members on the roster, roll call. supervisor farrell: aye. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor olague: aye. supervisor wiener: aye. supervisor avalos: no. supervisor campos: no. president chiu: no. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor cohen: aye. supervisor elsbernd: aye. >> eight ayes, 3 nos. president chiu: the motion

passes. colleagues, we have a couple of items left at 12:29. i want to thank the stenographers who are here and the staff and members of the public. hopefully we can go through the remaining items and get everyone home. could you call the adoption? >> items 24 through 28 without reference. they will be acted upon by a single vote unless they remember -- a member requests it be called the separately. president chiu: would anyone like to sever these items? supervisor farrell: aye. supervisor kim: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor olague: aye. supervisor wiener: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye.

supervisor chu: aye. supervisor cohen: aye. supervisor elsbernd: aye. there are 11 ayes. president chiu: the motion is approved. could you read the in memoriam. >> the meeting will be adjourned in the following for the late mrs. dorothy johansson, the late mr. james earl lee. president chiu: is there any more business in front of the board? it is 12:30 pm. good morning.