morning, just a few topics on the temporary terminal, to give you an update on how things are operating there. i have four key items i will speak to. one would be the shuttle bus relocation we're working on currently. i will touch on bicycle sharing, accessibility, and also operations. for a shuttle bus operations, currently we have shuttle bus operators with -- who are stopping on beale street, between mission and howard. we need to relocate these stocks because they're basically over the point where we will be excavating. we need to relocate them to proceed with the excavation for the train bus. we have five key operators that we're working with. so we have been working with

those operators, as well as the division of sustainable streets, to find an appropriate place to relocate these stops that are still convenient to the temporary terminal. and we have a proposal that we are working with right now, and that is to relocate these shuttles over to the northeast corner of howard and means street -- main street. on howard street, we're proposing to designate 105 feet of curb during commute hours, morning at 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., and in the afternoon 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., and we designate this as passenger loading zone. this would be on the north side of howard, just east of main street. during non-commute hours, this area would revert back to regular parking meters. there is a section of main

street that we're going to designate as passenger-loading. the east side of mian street, just north of howard street. that would be all they. this is a graphic showing those two sections of curbs. you can see the 105 feet of passenger loading zone on howard street and in the 40 feet of passenger loading on main street. we're working with the operators. they like this location. division of sustainable streets is on board with that. they are looking at a couple other options, but we think that this one probably holds the most promise. for bicycle sharing, the original design of a temporary terminal has 10 bicycle racks on the center island. this is a very well-used by the commuters. recently, we were approached by mta staff. we're working on a bicycle

sharing pilot program. they had an interest in having a bicycle sharing site near the temporary terminal. so we are working with them. we have looked at some installation sites adjacent to the tiberi terminal, particularly looking at -- and adjacent to the temporary terminal. particularly the lot at howard street. there are several layout we're looking at currently, but right now we do not have any funding. there is about five different schemes. each one has a level of sight work that needs to be done. so we need to look at that and try and find out whether we can find some funding for the options. accessibility, the tiberi terminal was designed to meet the current accessibility codes. we work very closely with the mayor's office of disability, as well as the dpw disability

access coordinator, and white house for the blind. that has been operating well. we have not had any accessibility issues reported. finally, on operations, link facilities. the facility manager is working closely with tjpa as well as ac transit and greyhound to maintain the temporary terminal operations and security. we also have the transit rider of restrooms. link is seeing roughly about 50 passengers a day use the rest rooms, with no reported incidents. finally, the temporary terminal serves approximately 20,000 passengers a day, and it has recently completed one year of operation, and we think it is operating very well. that is the end of my report.

any questions? >> that is the para transit service, i believe? >> yes. >> you have accessibility issues than on moving these things, and you are aware of those? continuous path, accessible paths? >> yes. >> i am sure kaiser permanente has some of the same issues. >> correct. >> ok. i will add that i have not received any complaints about the temporary terminal for seven r a eight months, so i know is going well. >> thank you. >> thank you pyeatt now i would like to have to sarah present the quarterly financial reports. >> good morning, directors. sarah. for our new directors, welcome. by way of background, these are quarterly financial reports. there on a quarterly basis.

the contract status report that lists all of the contracts with their amount, terms, and miscellaneous information such as dve and fpe participation. and investment report with our interest earnings. and a fourth report that we call in session today, showing all the expenditures and revenues for the life of the program by a major expenditure category. these will be the final reports until the annual financial statement for the fiscal year that just ended, june 30. the show that on the budget side, we were within budget. and i am happy to answer any questions. they're just the standard reports. >> any questions, members? and then the report is just fine. >> it great, thank you, directors. that concludes my report. >> ok.

we will move to the next item, number six, public comment, we do have a member of the public that wants to address on this item. jim has correspondence that he will share with the board. come on up, mr. patrick. >> good morning. my name is jim patrick, with patrick and company and san francisco. we have been in business since 1873. i did write a letter to the board, which they're passing out now. thank you for doing that. it talks about the west end exit way structure. you may not be familiar with that, but that is an exit way that exits from the park level only and also the first floor. it has turned out to be a very large building mass. and i would like to propose that we do away with this structure and find an exit interior within the building. the exit way does not support

the pedestrian environment and circulation report, which we will hear in the transbay plan. i believe there are better alternatives, and i believe we can sit in excess of $5 million by eliminating this particular item. i know what i am asking the board to do is to direct the architect for the tjpa, and i will be glad to serve on that facility, to evaluate the west and structure. i have in the endgame, it will allow for a graffiti pallette, just to think of the old exit ways they used to be in the old terminal. i also think of sleeping homeless people. just think of what has gone on in the past. it is not a good thing. i see really no value in it. i am interested in generating some board discussion about why we need that particular attribute in the terminal design.

>> members? director metcalf: i am new to this board. is there anyone who can be speak -- who can speak to the question? >> staff has been meeting with the board, and bob can speak to this. >> let the record reflect, i have not met with staff on this. >> he has met with bob, i believe. >> thank you, directors. the structure in question is located at the west end of the facility and has two components, one of which is an emergency exit stairwell for exiting from the park and is part of the exit ring function affecting the capacity of the park to hold events and the total number of people that can be hosted at the event. the second element is an elevator, which is intended to

give access to the park, and one of the intentions of the three points of access directly to the park that we have -- one of the west end at beale street, one at the main entrance of mission square, and this one at the west end, is to provide access to the park without bringing those passengers -- visitors in and through the building where they would be interacting with and adding to the flows of people who are accessing the transit functions of the transit center. there are ways of activating the park and bringing people directly into the park from the street level. we did early on look at different alternatives. we have looked at access from an area which we referred to as howard square, which is the area of of the pros structure and having an access point out and then above the top of the bus route as a freestanding

structure. that would have been a more expensive solution to this. the other is that the current development at the west end of the transit center is a variety of low-rise, you know, single two four-story buildings between the west end and second street, and currently, those buildings -- there is a blank wall that faces the transit center there at the west end, so there was not -- there is not currently a west end for the transit center as a building. for those reasons, the structure was kind of talk in at the west end of the transit center. -- kind of tucked in at the west end of the transit center.

>> i just want to remind the board that this item is not again rise -- agendized for discussion today. if you want to discuss this, you should consider putting it on the agenda for a future meeting. >> is this something you would like to agendize? director metcalf: i have so much to learn about the design. what is the normal process for this body of reviewing the design issues? >> we are happy to brief you on design issues. certainly, as part of my report, i could give you more in-depth briefing. we could always do that. or you could come to our office, and we could brief you directly. whatever you would like. i think we are good now. >> my experience -- for 12

years, i was on the emeryville redevelopment agency and counsel. i can tell you that the only thing i can say is one of the things we have learned is that when you do something as huge as what we're doing, you will affect everything around you in terms of buildings will turn around, things will happen because of what we're doing, and we that. it may be a wall now, but the question is -- from a permanent planning standpoint, and this is where san francisco staff comes in -- that wall -- it may not be in five or 10 years, but that building most likely will turn around, given what your doing, and we must be sensitive to that as well if that is an issue. i do not know. there's a whole lot of things. maybe it should be agendized, but i will not be here for it,

so i will not say one way or the other. director metcalf: i just want to say thank you for raising the issue. >> we have a long closed session. >> we are looking at building a building adjacent to that, and it has been to the knowledge of staff for many years, so we are trying to get the design finalize so we can move forward. the idea of there are other alternative exit ways to be had, so with a little thought and head-scratching, we can develop a win-win strategy, and right now, it is sort of a win-lose strategy. >> thank you very much. >> no other members of the public indicated they wanted to address you under public comment. with that, we can move into the consent calendar. >> we have three items. the minutes, which i will recuse myself from, from the last meeting. and then a couple of amendments. >> we can call the member -- the minutes separately, sever those

from the calendar. >> all right, is there any motion for approval on items 7.2 and 7.3? ok, and the objection? seeing none, passes unanimously. i will recused from item 7.1. any objection from the minutes? and you will recuse yourself, to appear are, are you going to recuse yourself? you were here. -- and he will recuse yourself, too. art, are you going to recuse yourself? you were here. that passes unanimously among members allowed to vote on it. what are we on now? regular calendar? presentation of the transit center district plan by the san francisco planning department, sort of. -- sort of apropos of our public comment. >> as i mentioned yesterday, mayor lee did mention that in early october, we should have

the draft released for the public. in anticipation of that, jobs will be giving a presentation on that plan and what it entails. >> good morning, directors. -- joshua -- josh will be giving a presentation on the plan and what it entails. >> good morning, directors. the plan was published in 2009 and has been on the streets for almost two years now for public review. what will be published in a short number of weeks is the draft environmental impact report for the plant, which will be a full analysis of the proposals and plan for public review and comments. the transit center district plan covers a broad swath of the southern side of the financial district from market street down to folsom street from the embarcadero to second and third

streets. it overlaps with the transbay redevelopment area, and covers almost the entirety of the area, but the plan will not be affecting any of the land use and development proposals for a zone 1, which the redevelopment agency has jurisdiction over and is overseeing the redevelopment of. zone two, the jurisdiction of which was transferred or delegated, i should say, to the city, back to the planning department, and is subject to the control of the city's planning code, and as such, that is subject to this rezoning. the plan will be rezoning essentially all of zone two as well as surrounding areas that are not part of it. this plan has several core objectives, the first of which

is a land use objective to recapitalize on the major investment that is transit center and really look at the south side of the downtown now that we are 25 years out from the adoption of the downtown plan in the mid-1980's and look at how the city should respond to the major public transit investment with the land use response. second, to look at how the downtown has evolved from a physical standpoint and see whether we ought to further kraft both the form of the downtown at the skyline level as well as the pedestrian level and what public realm response in terms of streets and public spaces should be improved to provide a more world-class setting for the transit center and all the increased activity that will take place in the area. importantly, our key goal of the plan is to generate a substantial amount of new revenue for the transit center project as well as for other infrastructure that is needed to

support the district. all the increased activity from the transit center as well as the increase dedication as part of the downtown. streets and so forth are substantially lacking, and i will talk more about that in a second year lastly, to insure that the continuing growth of the district is sort of a shining model of environmental sustainability. i will talk more about that. i mentioned the draft plan was published in november 2009. the draft eir will be out at the end of the month. we anticipate the final adoption and hearings at the planning commission will commence probably at the end of february, given our current schedule. as i mentioned, the transit center district plan builds on the foundations established in the downtown plan in the 1980's, the premise that the downtown should remain combat and walkable, that market street is

sort of center -- should remain compact and walkable. really, that the core of downtown is right around the transit center. as such, the plan proposes to modify the development allowances in terms of heights and densities in this area. to further reflect this, i should mention that the downtown plan did assert and establish that the area did immediately establish that the transit center at the time was zoned for the highest heights and greatest in city's downtown, the highest heights being around 550 feet immediately adjacent to the transit center. this plan seeks to enhance the division of the downtown block -- the vision of the downtown plan and more cement the downtown district as the real core of the 21st century downtown by increasing densities further and allowing more transit-oriented development immediately around the transit

center. the plan proposes to increase heights strategically, to crown the downtown skyline. you can see that there is a small consolation of other sites surrounding the transit center that would be increased in allowable heights up to 700 to 850 feet. you can see that the skyline has a very graceful silhouette and really emphasizes this area as the center of the downtown. i just have a couple of slides showing you what the future skyline might look like with

these proposed heights. this is a view of the downtown looking east from the top of twin peaks. you can see market street running down the center. you can see the downtown emphasized on the far northern and -- end. the city re-evaluated its growth patterns and shifted development south of market street. you can see that the skyline really has taken on a more elongated configuration. the plan, as you can see, would really emphasize the transit center area, which is really the center of the downtown today, which extends all the way down to the ring, hill area -- the rincon hill area. the transit center is the

center, and this would emphasize that. here is another computer simulation of what the skyline will look like. we did countless simulations for the public to weigh these changes. our website has had 16 or 20 different public views simulated on our website that people can scroll through, and the draft eir has quite a number as well. here is a view from treasure island. in terms of land use, the plant currently proposed would eliminate the floor-area ratio cap, which currently exists in the downtown, currently limited at 18 to one, and the plan would propose to eliminate that and have an unlimited f.a.r. allowance in the districts of the buildings could be built to this district. additionally, given that this area in the transit center

district essentially represents the last development sites in the downtown, you probably know that the northern part of the financial district essentially built out. there are no major development sites left. in this area, there are a few significant ones, and because you are probably familiar with the redevelopment plan, zone 1, which i mentioned, is proposing and is carrying out the creation of a new residential neighborhood immediately to the south of this area. so in order to continue to have space for continued job growth in the downtown, the planning department thinks that it would be advisable to ensure that major development sites in this plan area are focused on commercial development so that we do preserve those few sites that are feasible for continued job growth. in terms of square footage, the plan would -- in total once it

is all but out -- represent the addition of over nine square feet of development in the area, about 2/3 of which we are projecting would be office space, or close to 6.5 million square feet of office space, which, as you can see, represents 40% or 50% up-zoning of this area from what is allowed under current zoning. though the focus would be on commercial development, there would still be substantial amounts of residential development that we would anticipate on smaller sites and sites immediately outside of the core. we anticipate over 1300 units, plus hotel rooms and retail space. plan does not focus just on the skyline and what the city would look like from a macro standpoint, but really also take to heart making sure that these buildings create a high-quality pedestrian experience in the public realm as you walk around

the district, and proposes various guidelines to ensure active ground floors and ensure that these tall buildings continue to allow sunlight to meet the streets and establish a comfortable space. as i mentioned, the current street and sidewalks environment in the area, as you probably are familiar, is somewhat dismal, if i could put that out there. there are a few pedestrian entities. in some places, the sidewalks are narrow, and you can see they are already congested or lack basic amenities like street trees, benches, bicycle racks, and everything you might expect from a world-class downtown environment. in places, the sidewalks are already congested, and with the addition of 9 million square feet of development as well as the additional activity that will come from the completion of the transit center, this will be

a very incredibly busy place, more so then you might even see in the northern financial district today. the plan proposes to transform the rights of way in the area by widening of the sidewalks in the area. the plan proposes that the goal would be to establish an average rail, so there is approximately 5 feet to amenities face. this will require major policy decisions on the part of the city to rethink the allocation. it will require the removal of a substantial amount of on street parking to make way for a wider sidewalks. and all the amenities that we think will be necessary to make this the kind of place that we all want it to be. in addition to wider and improved sidewalks, we worked

substantially with the mta to improve -- to insure that transit can move officially through the district and release serve the transit center and the development in the area efficiently. the plan proposes dedicated transit lanes on mission street, potentially center-running transit lanes so that buses are not stuck in a congested, which, as is always the case, is projected to increase over time -- so the buses are not stuck in congested -- in congestion. the plan proposes to augment the bicycle network, and as well, to achieve circulation improvements, the plan proposes to analyze converting portions of howard and fulsome that are currently one way or to a predicted two-way to improve local circulation as well as

achieve certain traffic coming benefits -- converting portions of howard and fulsom that are currently one way to two way. you can see surrender of wider sidewalks, dedicated transplants, crosswalks, and so forth. additionally, the plan has a comprehensive set of transportation policies that go beyond the physical. in terms upper -- in terms of parking, the downtown, even prior to the downtown plan, has had very strict parking allowances. there are no required parking minimums in the downtown, and they're currently is a fairly low caps. nonetheless, we feel and working with the mta feel that even this with the mta feel that even this is potentially too much, that