process of 2003. this is the completion of the project, which i would be happy to report. it seems to be moving forward, and we have the design presentation that was required for the commissioner to take a look at the design before they went forward. but was interesting out of this presentation, and this was a subject that was frequently brought up. everyone wants to know the context of the people who live in these new projects that have just been completed. the project sponsor volunteered they have about 1000 residents there in these towers. he said the record shows 75% are full-time records. the other 25% are split equally between 12.5% ranchers. we hear a lot of representation, and this is only one project,

but it may be representative of many of the new projects that have been built, project early self of market -- south of market. it would appear that a very high percentage of people do make this their full-time residents. also, it is entirely sold, all eyes are many of these. we often hear representations' there is a full flood of unsold condominiums, which is not the case, opera to curly in this area. i thought that was very interesting, and hopefully we can have later presentations from other projects as we go forward to tell us about the characteristics of the people who live there in terms of whether their full-time residents, whether they have cars or not, how many children. one other thing that came out of this is there will be a lot more larger units. another words, two and three

bedrooms as opposed to the earlier iteration, which had more studios in one bedroom. they found they have so many families that this has become a popular configuration. that is very encouraging. commissioner borden: we talked about having a hearing this month on the african american out migration. i want to make sure we get that on the calendar. we're already in february and the time will be passed very quickly. maybe we can look at the last thursday of the month. the second thing is redistricting. i know it is not our jurisdiction, but it would be interesting to have someone talks about the process. i recognize in a lot of ways from our standpoint it does not matter in the same sort of way, but it is a big issue that will

affect land use and decisions in other ways. maybe someone from the task force were chair could come talk about the process and how things can be engaged in can ponder what, if any, implications it has for us. >> i have been meeting with people regarding the project that will probably come to us and a few months and have had the pleasure of attending a forum on sales force at mission bay. standing-room-only into the hall. obviously very interesting questions came up. very interesting presentation, and we will see it here shortly. >> thank you, commissioners. if there are no other matters,

we can move on to directors report, which involves announcements and review of the past events. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. a couple of things i want to tell you briefly. not a whole lot to report on the past week on the redevelopment agency elimination, except that the redevelopment agency no longer exist as of yesterday. we knew that was coming in the past couple of weeks. the board of supervisors did approve legislation that the mayor put forward, as well as creating the successor agency. as you recall the portable housing asset will go to the mayor's office of housing and all other assets will go to the city administrator's office. the comptroller's office is setting up a trust fund to except the fund from those areas. casthose funds will be used as y

are obligated to be used under existing contracts. the remaining guns will be distributed as they would be to the normal taxing entities. san francisco is both a set county and city, we are in a better shape than those that have to be split. since we are in one government, we are in somewhat better shape. beyond that, the logistics of how we're going to operate as an oversight board and successor agency are still to be determined. you probably know the staff of the agency will continue for at least two months. it buys them some breathing room, the city breathing room to help work this out to determine what stopped oversize board will need -- what staff the board

will meet. it is a huge issue that is consuming a lot of time from a lot of people to figure that out. i cannot even tell you that this point when the first meeting because the schedule has not been set yet. but as soon as we know, i will try to get that information to you. the second issue is that the mayor has kicked off a meeting of a housing trust fund committee today an hour and a half ago. this is a large group has asked to convene from all members of the housing community from activist to developers to finance folks to look at the issue of how to develop alternative funding mechanisms for affordable housing, particularly in light of the lost tax increment from redevelopment, which was the city's largest single source of affordable housing. the goal of the mayor has given us is to look at a range of

financing mechanisms. he made it clear that everything was on the table, but if we were to recommend that some of these mechanisms might require a ballot measure, he has asked to do that in the timely way so we to get something on november ballot. that work will have to proceed very quickly in order to make the november ballot. back to the redevelopment for one second. because of the unknowns, we also do not know what the impact on the department's budget might be. what you will see today is the budget does not reflect yet anything read -- related to redevelopment. so if and when that does happen, we will have to come back to you with additional information, and perhaps a supplementary budget request at that time, but we just do not know yet. in we're hoping we will know and the next few months. that is my presentation unless

there are any questions. commissioner sugaya: does the city know or have made a projection on the amount of -- tax increment will still be collected uncertain project areas, but is that -- will increment not be collected in other areas, and has the city made a projection on how much that is? >> the comptroller is running those numbers right now. you are correct that it will not be collected out of -- other in those three areas. mission bay, hunters point, and mission bay area 1. -- transbay area 1. there are four other taxing entities that will also get the

funds as they would normally. >> good afternoon, commissioners. emery rogers to give you your weekly review of the board of supervisors as they pertain to planning and land use. i would like to start off with something that happened at the rules committee hearing last week. one of which requires analyzing proposed legislation that might negatively affect jobs. and in those circumstances this charter amendment would be required for the small business commission to review the economic impact. last week that was amended to include the planning commission in review of anything that might negatively affect job loss. and that piece of ordinance will be heard later today at the rules committee as it has been amended. this week at the land use

committee hearing they heard the glen park community plan come in this would be an ordinance for the plan. this is culminating approval for 10 years worth of community planning. the commission considered the ordnances and recommended approval on november 10 of last year. at that time you approved the document as drafted. this week supervisor wiener officially sponsored the legislation and recommended approval to the committee. department staff provided an overview of the plan and supervisors comments included strong interest in seeing transportation projects implemented by sf mta.] the committee unanimously voted approval to the full board. the committee also heard an ordinance introduced by a mayor lee that would introduce the city process for white knight -- lightning's sidewalks. and-- widening sidewalks.

the current process is lengthy and involves review by several city agencies, and even action by the board of supervisors. and now that the city has adopted guidance on how to widen sidewalks, it seems appropriate to make it easier to do so. this ordinance would not change or review the process for narrowing sidewalks, only for widening sidewalks that meet city law and are recommended for approval by city agencies. all other changes would go through the current process, and the committee recommended approval of this process for the board. and the india park introduced by supervisor cohen was before the committee. you unanimously approved this last year. it would amend the plan as it extends across third street to allow a multi-use health care service at 53rd street.

the legislation would enable a medical clinic up to 15,000 square feet as a principal use and above c.u. subsequent to the committee's action, supervisor cohen amended the legislation in response to concerns from industrial neighbors. at the january 30 committee, the land use pass legislation as the committee report and the full board voted on it the following day. they also approved it unanimously. other items before the full board -- i think that was the only thing before the full board. there were a few things introduced i would like to share with you. and the first is the ordinance you work on, the restaurant ordinance, which has simplified controls for restaurants. the changes you have and you're hearing were numerous, so what happened is instead of revising that in committee, a full new

ordinance that incorporates your modifications has been introduced come and that is currently under the 30-day hold. i should mention supervisor wiener and a lotolgaue for supervisors of that. supervisor kim supervise legislation for [inaudible] . president chu introduces nomination for some thcindy wu. this item will be heard at 1:30 today, along with a nomination for board of appeals. moving on, i have the board of appeals report. they did not meet last night, but the board president has dominatenominated mr. zaoto.

both of those nominations in the charter of them it will be heard later on today. that concludes my report unless there are any questions. >> thank you. commissioner antonini: mr. rogers, in the proposed legislation is passed, would require us to look at the negative affects of any particular project might have on the loss of jobs in one way or another. one would assume this is in addition to i believe it was pro p h that require the city to look at any negative impacts of legislation the city was passing. this would specifically target jobs, correct?

>> that is correct. the comptroller's office started as a quick economic look to see if there is something that should be looked at and for their economic detail. there would be additional analysis reporting and perhaps advisory recommendations. in the same way that you review planning legislation, the board could not act on that legislation until either the commission had reviewed it for 60 days have passed. >> it is not project, it is legislation. commissioner antonini: right. thank you. >> commissioners, historic preservation commission did meet yesterday, and there are really only two items i would like to report. they considered the transit center district, survey update, and they adopted staff recommendation.

they also heard article 10 and 11. they continued discussing their concerns for article 10 come and they had a chance to complete article 7, 11. we will have a full report on their actions when it comes before you later today. to cook the commission might be interested in the project that that eache hpc approved yesterd they approved the restoration of the building and reuse as an office building. you will see that as well. they will insert a mezzanine floor and converted to offices. very interesting project that you will be seeing in a few weeks i think. >> that concludes those reports.

commissioners, you are now at the 15 minute general public comment category. the public may at trust you on items that fall within the subject matter jurisdiction. with the exception of the agenda items, they may not be addressed during the category, but only at the time they are reached on calendar. it is important to remember this category has a 15-minute time limit, and there are a number of speakers. and >commissioner moore: thank -- president miguel: thank you. chilinda chapman and brad hall. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name mashoshona mgrew.

i wanted to present this information regarding the proposed soccer field. it that could be given to the commission? thank you. i worked for the rec and park for 37 years. i was an active member in the master plan for golden gate park. and i am opposed to putting plastic, artificial turf down at the historic beach chalet. you have heard this before, but i wanted to bring it to the new commission. >> good afternoon, commissioners. catherine howard. i am here today to talk about the soccer field project. this project will be located at the western end of golden gate park. they will remove the metal and replace it with over 7 acres of

artificial turf, gravel, plastic, and ground up tire waste. they will install 10 at 60-foot lights that will be on that from sunset until 10:00 every night of the year. i have a letter today which you may not have seen. it was submitted by the cultural landscape foundation. the cultural landscape foundation is dedicated to increasing the public's awareness and understanding of the importance and irreplaceable legacy of the cultural landscapes. through education, technical assistance and are reached they have brought and awareness and support for historic landscapes nationwide in hopes of saving the price lids -- priceless heritage for future generations. cultural landscapes provide a sense of the state and identity. the map our relationship with the land over time and part of the national heritage and lives. later i will give you what was given by the president of the

natural landscape foundation. he is author of the national park service's guideline for the treatment of cultural landscape. thiin his letter he encourages e city to accept only alternatives that are acceptable to the department. the project, as proposed, will result in a substantial adverse impact and potentially affect the significance of the athletic fields. we ask that you seriously analyze alternatives that would not negatively affect the integrity of golden gate park. sf ocean edge supports the soccer field. there is an alternative that protects the integrity of golden gate park and preserving the birdie -- preserving the beauty of the part for you today in future generations.

we ask the planning department's consider the alternative that follows. renovate the field with national grass and no night lighting. renovate the west's sense that playground with improved playing services and lighting for youth soccer. i will submit this for review. thank you very much. >> good afternoon, commissioners. executive director of livable city. i will not be able to stay for an ordinance later on in the agenda, but i want to speak generally about the bonus of the height bonus. this is one of the best ideas to come out of the eastern neighborhoods in southern neighborhood planning. the idea is if you are in a 40 foot zone you and allow -- you allow an additional 5 feet. doing so creates much more generous commercial spaces,

which are must -- much better adaptable to a variety of uses. and it is a great urban design. it will also help create really depressed neighborhood commercial districts. i think about 18 street where i live. the reason they are able to do that is ground force spaces are flexible enough that you can have all kinds of uses. lifting the ground floor of a little bit creates in the first base that is adaptable to a wide variety of uses. we think it should be done and all the districts in the city that allow mixed use. all of the sea districts c distc districts in mixed uses. that said, i just want to talk about the transportation sustainability program. this was on your agenda last week. mostly this is headed in the

right direction. if you look at who will pay the impact fees like a non-profit thing like salvation army, but a parking structure will not pay the impact fee. the reason being there is a way in which the department as an environmental review. no amount of parking will change it in any way. you will remember me discussing this with regards to the city place development. i said if you put more parking in there, there will be more. south was thing that is not true. i think your director said it is generally true but not true in the case of city place. it is generally true, we should fix it. it runs contrary to economic theory. if so, the downtown plan should not work. sf park should not work. classical economic should not

work. the problem is if you make the assumption that the 10,000 parking space garage will not generate any additional vehicle trips, still no feet. we really need you to fix this. you will get a logjam of stability -- stupidity behind this. the amount of parking does affect parking behavior. plan accordingly. this plan will give you a discount if you do less parking. we need the commission to take the next up and say if you do for parking, you have a bigger impact really hope when this is board -- before you for adoption that you include this in the provision. thank you. >> linda chapman of a conditional use of alcohol licenses. i do not want to presume to tell you, but i heard a lot of

confusion about what your authority was or was not from the city attorney's office and staff. and i just want to reiterate as best i can understand from having gone to abc and consulted with abc, you are the ones that have the additional authority. on the land use, because as i mentioned come if you say no it should not be here, it will not. they will defer to you with regard to whether or not it can be here and what are the conditions of the conditional use. they cannot proceed until your conditional use condition has been done. i suppose when you say you understand sometimes you understand you cannot make a decision on alcohol, but maybe that is an area where there are not conditional use. there are areas like market street or something. in our area all of them are conditional uses.

you could stop all of them dead or at least restrict hours like you will do on one today i am glad to see. that is your authority. some of them will go to the board of supervisors, but do not assume they will. maybe if there is a liquor store come it will go there. because abc will send it there. if there is food involved or restaurant, it is not going to go there, or a 47 license, not going to go to the board of supervisors unless there is an actual conditional use appeal. at abc they are going to say the planning commission said it was ok, no problem there. the board of supervisors normally says it is ok as far as we can tell. it is important to realize that if you send notices we might realize it. the board of supervisors does not send notices for those hearings. when i talk to the committee

secretary, she cannot tell me how to give notice. i guess we can look at the committee every single week, but they can apply any time before they come here or after they come here for the hearing they have come if they have won. and they do not necessarily. the only happen if they are in a high-crime area or over saturated. and in addition there is no food involved. it is really important that you actually be asserting your authority when you can't can now they're going around try to get groups to change positions. and i hope that you are asking staff to report to you so you can perhaps amend the conditions to do what you want them to do. president miguel: thank you. >> members of the commission, brad paul. i know how much your looking

forward to reading this. i thought i would draw your attention to one page and i think you might find really interesting. that is page3b4. it is where the answer my questions about the construction question. i said based on math it would take 22. they say at the bottom of the page i am right. and it will take 22 months. they further say it at an updated by the project sponsor's construction project in the following way. on the next page they cross out 20 trips per day and write in 19 per day. why those numbers? that is how you get to keep seven months. let's take a look at what that really means. if you go from 20 truck trips today to 19, you go from three trucks an hour to 14 an hour.

what that means is to go from a truck every 20 minutes to a truck every four minutes. you go from 100 trucks per day to two minutes. we're talking about putting a dump truck on the embarcadero every two minutes. there is another problem, and that is traffic lights. as you pull out of the site you start to hit traffic lights. the one at washington yesterday at a time and it is at 45 seconds. i happen to know about dump trucks. my grandfather owned one. when it was full, it was very hard to stop and start up. you have the traffic lights all along the embarcadero. if you're trying to keep trucks going down the street, it is going to be a mess. the common say it is not a problem, do not worry about it-- the comments say it