middle. this is how it would exist under existing zoning. there are new dwellings. they mesh with the existing skyline, which you can see stretching on either side of market street. next is a simulation of what the skyline would look like with buildings built under the proposed plan heights. you can see the transit tower as the highest building, capping the skyline, accentuating the court of downtown with new buildings that would be enabled under the plan, shaded in a slight blue color. it would pull the whole skyline together with the trans american building and the buildings on rincon hill. we have other simulations that help inform the public about

what these changes would look like. we used simulations from all of the key public vantage points around the city. here is the view from treasure island, a fairly dramatic view of the city. from a land use standpoint, i mentioned the gold is to concentrate additional density around this major transit investment. to that and -- end and to help reach these heights, it would eliminate the 18 to 1 maximum currently downtown, and would let buildings achieve unlimited f.a.r. within the height limits and the zoning. the plan proposes to emphasize

commercial developments over residential and hotel development in this area, based on a thorough analysis of what we see as the major priorities for limited space in this area. the planning department and planning commission have done a lot of planning in this area, as i mentioned. there is a plan for a new downtown residential neighborhood on the south side of this area. i believe the number is 5000 to 7000 new units. given all the dialogue

surrounding regional smart growth issues, it is a higher priority to take advantage of our corps regional transit facilities, with close proximity to barton and metro region art -- to bart and metro. we do not have other parts of the city where we could concentrate other jobs in proximity to regional transit. the plan will consolidate a ratio of commercial space to non-commercial space. we are not concerned about small lots, but will make sure on the very large lots that the large buildings have significant commercial space. you can see the numbers of what the plan area would build up to over a long time, 20 years or

so. over 9 million square feet of additional space, 2/3 of which would be office space, a little over 6 million square feet -- this does still leave room for other uses. we do anticipate over 1300 new housing units and hotel rooms, as well as ground floor and other retail threat the district. in terms of how that relates to existing zoning, it is about 40% of the zoning of the capacity of the area, about 4 million square feet of the 9 million the plan would allow. in terms of urban design and place making, we are not concerned just with the skyline, although that is a major consideration, but with how the people experience the district as pedestrians, making sure it is a world-class, exciting, and

comfortable place to be. the plan proposes to augment the existing guidelines in the planning code in downtown plan with additional guidelines or controls as they may manifest to ensure we have active ground floors. one way to do that is to limit the potential expense of lobbies on the ground floor. this is something new york city has done and we hope to do as well, to make sure we have active retail and public open space, and other things that help create a vibrant downtown. we are also looking at how to make sure tall buildings reenforce the comfortable public space at street level by defining a street that is more in scale with the pedestrian experience, not just concerned about making sure we do not have

tall towers without consideration for how they feel from a physical presence as a pedestrian. as well, we took a lot -- a look at controls related to control four towers of this size, which do not currently have controls in the planning code. at ground level, the plan really takes on the issue of how we can create a real world class public realm and meet the circulation needs of the district of this density in the future. the streets are bleak from a pedestrian standpoint. the sidewalks range from 8 feet to 15 feet, which may be wide in other parts of the city, but not downtown. they feature very few pedestrian

amenities. they can get quite congested in places. additionally, we want to ensure that surface transit, buses, and every one who needs to circulate to the area, models continue to predict increasing auto congestion. we need to make sure this district lives up to its billing. the plan proposes an ambitious project to widen most of the sidewalks in the planned area, up to an average of 18 to 21 feet, as well as provide the amenities and by correcting need on the sidewalks to create a memorable and enjoyable place to be. in addition to the sidewalks, we need to improve our transit lines, make sure they are

enforceable in dedicated, and that muni can circulate through this district. we have been working with muni to draft some proposals that are being refined to make sure the allocation of right of way in the streets puts transit and pedestrians as the highest priorities for moving people around the district. we are also doing things to enhance the pedestrian experience by providing crosswalks to mitigate the size of very long blocks in this area and help disperse people around the district so they do not concentrate in just a few corners. we want to implement a bicycle not work and look at how we can improve facilities beyond that. i am also looking at how to humanize the proportion of one- way streets to two-way streets.

this is what it might look like in the future, with dedicated transit lines, why sidewalks, and so forth. beyond the streets themselves, weo need to tackle other core transportation issues to make sure we do achieve the mode shares for transit use, walking, bicycling, and carpooling we need to ensure growth can occur without congesting the downtown. building off of the fairly aggressive parking policies of the downtown plan, we see a need to take it further. this area is the core of downtown. it has the worst congestion areas. we cannot facilitate additional growth of auto use in this area.

the plan proposes to cut in half the amount of allowable nonresidential parking in the area. the plan also calls for a study to someday establish more of an absolute cap in the number of parking spaces in the downtown, based on what a study of the streets can accommodate. the plan does support further examinations of congestion pricing as a necessary tool. the plan proposes more nuanced improvements to the transportation management tools that are currently in place downtown. i know you are familiar with the 5.5 acre park that will be built on the roof of the transit center. the plan does look at how we can improve access to that major new

amenity, as well as enhance open space in general, by looking at opportunities for other open space in this district, which has few public open spaces. there are small privately owned spaces that have been built alongside commercial developments. second and howard is a location where there could be a new public plaza. unfortunately, a number of historic buildings will ultimately need to be removed. assuming that continues to be the case, a new public plaza looks to be a gateway to the transit center. to the south, it is mainly lined

by alleys. the plan proposes to encourage new buildings adjacent to the transit center to offer direct connections to the transit center part, public connections. we can make sure people have access to this rooftop park and a gets well used and is a real amenity for the district with open space requirements and direct connections to the rooftop park. in terms of historic resources, the planning department did engage in a historic resources survey during the planning process. i believe in 2008 or 2009, the landmarks board did adopt survey findings that covered everything, essentially, from

market to fall some -- folsom, out to third street. it recommended certain potential landmark buildings and a recommended expansion of our existing second and montgomery conservation district. you can see on the next map that the plan does propose the second new montgomery concentration, to take up plants that were left out of the initial conservation district, as well as to review and upgrade a lot of the ratings for the buildings in the district. the plan also identified for bang buildings that could be potential new article 10

landmarks. there are pictures of three of them on one of your slides. there is a more daring union hall on second street, one of few examples on the city, with spectacular art work. the hotel, a poster of quick residential hotel -- a post earthquate residential that is one -- earthquake residential hotel that is one of the only wood from hotels in the city. one of the more innovative things the plan proposes to do is to address sustainability beyond the land use and transportation measures we are used to dealing with in the planning department and planning commission. we are really trying to push the envelope about what we should be considering when we are

building out these very dense districts. the scope of the development that will be built here, as well as the balance of uses and the concentration of development, potentially lends itself to a more coordinated system of energy, heat, and cooling for buildings, something you see as the norm in europe and the u.k., which is a combined heat and power system, where you can generate electricity and use the waste heat to heat and cool buildings. it is something that has potential to substantially improve a greenhouse gas emissions and energy efficiency and economic efficiency of buildings in this district. we have been working with the department of the environment.

we've been looking in terms of water usage. this is in the water ordinance district. all of these buildings have to be dueled -- dual plumbed to expedite provision of recycled water to serve a lot of the water needs of this district, because you do not have to use pure water to do all these things. you could use non potable water if we could find a local source for that. the last topic is money. all of this stuff costs money. there are open space

improvements, transportation improvements. there are concepts for sustainable resource districts. ahoy the total for all of these improvements and infrastructure is north of $500 million. on the second last slide, you can see what the plan proposes in terms of helping to fund these improvements and helping to fund the transit center. we are finishing the necessary nexus' studies -- nexus studies about how to fund the spaces.

all ultimately, the fee levels will differ from what is in the plan. we have studies to ultimately set the fees. these are illustrated, but we think these can be achieved and are sustainable by the economics of the building. we think we can raise this. there is a potential major source of funding, particularly to help pay for the transit center. the potential amounts are critique large, anywhere from $250 to $300 that could be raised to pay for other improvements. this is essentially a property- tax that new development would pay overtime that could be bonded to pay for major public

infrastructure. there is something we are not sure whether we will be able to carry forward, but we are continuing to evaluate it. essentially, that would be a supplemental transfer tax on sales of properties in the district, also to help generate revenue for the transit center and other improvements. essentially, that concludes my recap of the content and proposals of the plan. the plan is available online for the public to download. we have freshly printed copies available for purchase, or cd's. we will continue to take public comment on the plan. we are happy to take public comment on this. president olague: is there any

public comment on this item? seeing none, public, it is close. commissioner moore: great job. good summary. however, how does this particular project afloat in the current environment of uncertainty? the san francisco redevelopment agency, with many of us unclear of the ultimate consequences due to the shift in sacramento, what does a partnership with zone 1 and zone to of this project mean, relative to the overall set up of this project? >> to my understanding, and maybe the planning director can help me a little bit, we recently passed state legislation which allows the redevelopment agency to continue to exist. they have certain payments they would need to continue to make to the state in order to

continue to operate. they are well prepared to do so. while new product areas may have questions, the project areas including trans bay that are already adopted -- will move forward as planned. >> i think that is generally correct. as i was mentioning a couple of weeks ago, there are two pieces of legislation that were adopted. the second piece does allow them to continue to exist if they make certain payments to the state. most of the plan is not in the redevelopment area. it does not require a new redevelopment area to be created. >> in the professional press, the amount of money sacramento is asking back is significantly higher. i am saying that modest

criticism in order for us to keep it in our conversation. your tally is extremely high. i cannot even count the billions of dollars. literally, with the united states in the federal government hovering at the edge of a major financial crisis, this is a very ambitious project. while i wish it all look, i believe i mentioned to you a few weeks ago that some of the developers have declared they cannot deliver within the framework what they had intended to do. i