i would make a suggestion. i cannot enforce it, but i would make a suggestion. if you would talk to your clients and have them get together with the other fast- food restaurants that are directly adjacent to them, and call on washington high school, as a group, and tell them their students are causing a problem. it has to be done periodically. the school does something -- you have to do it again. it would be an indication that there are students, over which the schools do have some immediately -- and needed control, are causing problems

for the neighborhood. the kids want the restaurants. the schools want the restaurants. that is excellent for the neighborhood. but they have to get together in order to get some operation -- cooperation. the zero as a group and discuss it with the school and see what -- got together as a group and discuss it with the school and see what can be done. >> thank you. commissioner borden: i am also very familiar, i used to live in the district. you mentioned that you are looking into actions, can you talk about that? >> there are to use is at the property that had previous conditional use authorizations. it is for -- there is a self

service specialty yogurt shop around the corner. we have to figure out whether or not those are in violation. commissioner borden: i would offer adding language -- i am not sure if you would want to do it -- but around loitering. non consumption loitering. i know there is a little bit of that issue of blocking garages and other things. maybe they could encourage something like that. she mentioned people blocking the gates. also, perhaps, i know they have to do -- can we ask them to put a trash can outside of their business? >> i think there would be open to that, yes.

commissioner sugaya: i want to clarify the sidewalk language. i do not think these guys should be responsible for what their neighbors are doing. the implication is that it says "and all sidewalks of budding the property -- abutting the property." can you tell me how far it that those? i do not think it is their responsibility to do that. >> that means that it is what in front of their storefront.

>> are they on the eastern side? >> anyway. it would seem if there is a problem, staff is already looking into whether or not the conditions are being enforced by the other establishments. i noticed that applies -- the sidewalk cleanup would apply to the two conditioner uses? >> possibly so. the sidewalk man's condition -- maintenance condition is typical to food establishments. >> there are four restaurants. >> the property owner is not here today, right? >> no. >> it seems like a little bit

should fall upon the property owner. commissioner moore: i take issue with the loitering. i do not think that is part of what the planning code allows us to do. it is a different discussion. i would support commissioner miguel's suggestion that the business association or the businesses themselves have some conversation with the high school to participate as more active participants in the over all appearance of the neighborhood. i cannot support loitering because that has a whole different set of implications. >> ok. commissioner antonini: i am a supporter of -- i am supportive of the comments by the other commissioners.

you have a lot of disposable products, i would think, that lend themselves to disposable packaging. it is really important that the restaurant make sure and police the area and make sure their patrons know not to letter. if they do letter, it is cleaned up. we see this a lot and this seems like, in some places, there is a big pile of litter on the ground and nothing in the garbage cans. i think we need education on the use of garbage cans. i certainly support the project, but it is just making sure that the neighborhood is not trashed. this would go for the existing establishments also. >> made the offer something like facebook checked in and throw away your garbage? commissioner sugaya: there was a

mention of a trash can on the sidewalk. can you do that? >> [inaudible] >> [inaudible] >> it is illegal. >> usually, they have it right in front of their door. >> all right. >> i see them all the time. >> anyway, the other good thing is that this is the furthest to the west. all of their trash will blow to the other storefronts. commissioner wu: on the other

condition, the community liaison, i need to ask that it is very clear to the neighbors to the community liaison is and that they have someone they can call when there is an issue. >> ok. there is a public trash can right outside the store. there are four bus stops there. there is a trash bin right next to the bus station. the store owner does plan to but a 65-gallon trash bin at right next to her entrance. " i believe a motion was made. no? >> i do not have a motion. >> i move approval. >> second.

>> the conditions are as proposed? >> yes. the motion on the floor is for approval with conditions as proposed on that motion. commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner miguel: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye. president fong: aye. commissioner wu: aye. you are now on item number 11. the transit center district plan. these are for initiation. initiation of amendment to the general plan.

initiation of the amendment to the planning code. initiation of amendment to the zoning map. commissioner sugaya: i have to ask the board for accuse so. i did -- recusant. i did discuss this with the city attorney's office. because the firm i worked on and worked on the survey, which resulted in information being used any environmental impact report, back in that same situation i was with the eastern neighborhoods plan and market october yet -- market octavia. that was because of the participation, i am conflicted on the eir. until the eir is certified, i cannot participate in the discussion on the zoning aspects of the transit center plan.

once it has been certified, without my participation, i am free to participate in this aspect of the deliberations. >> motion for accusal. >> motion to recuse commissioner sugaya. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner wu: aye. president fong: aye. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am with the planning department. we are here at an important point in the history of the very important project. before i -- before we give the details of the actions that we are asking you to take, i would like to give a brief history of the project that is in front of you. how we got here and why the department believes this is a good time to move forward with this project.

before i got here, of course, i inherited this project. the plan was initiated by the department in response to the city and county is interagency transbay working group. that the group, at that point, in 2006, recommended a multifaceted strategy for financing high-capacity transit station at the site of the terminal. real-estate development was a key component at that time with the goal of land value capture as a major part, not the only parts, of the strategy. high-density -- it was also a key recommendation of the 1985

plan. san francisco has known for nearly 30 years that building high-density around the terminal was the right thing to do. we probably knew that well in advance of most cities in the u.s. at that time. that recommendation has always been a part of the downtown plan. in 2007, date issued a development competition for the terminal and power site. that competition did anticipate the city's tallest buildings. in 2007, the department began the planning effort in partnership with the redevelopment agency. that effort focused on what is a small part of downtown around the terminal on the south market. there was extensive public outreach to the community. a full draft of the plan was

issued for public comment in 2009. the eir was begun in earnest. we have been at this for a long time. the plan was issued two years ago. initiation of a series of actions that would allow you to take action on the eir. in general, please see four goals of the plan. one is to generate revenue for the terminal and the tunnel. the terminal is under construction and the tunnel is planned and cleared environmentally, but not yet fully funded. this plan represent a significant component of that fund the project. secondly is to implement the downtown plan. since its inception, it has talked about a high-density core at this location. the third is to provide

capacity for additional office growth. we have spent a lot of time in the last several gears focusing on creating additional capacity for residential growth. what we now are focusing on in both this plan and the central corridor plan is focusing on job growth and the city -- in this city. it has lagged behind in the city relented to the region. to create a model for sustainable high-density urban district. there are a number of things that staff has mentioned about how we are proposing to do that. creating a high-density district around the terminal is a huge sustainable goal in itself. it is a very comprehensive approach to the planning this district. we have changes in land use, of course, densities, hyde said.

-- heights. we have proposals for expanding the historic district. we have a plan for financing the improvement the plan calls for. it is important to recognize that the density being proposed allowed many of the public amenities to be funded through the plant itself. these densities can create land value capture that the plan itself can pay for much, if not all, of the amenities. at the same time, provide a very substantial contribution to the terminal and the tunnel. it is also a important, i think, there is always discussion and angst and san francisco about a very tall buildings. this is not about creating high rises for the sake of high- rises. the goal of this plan is for high density environment connected to high-density

transit. for capturing that revenue for the transit and public amenities to go forward. i think it is important to remember that this is a plan that is proposing highrises in a place they are today. this is simply growing up instead about. there are five good reasons to move forward. i would like to talk about that a little bit. one is the regional growth issue. we have felt for a long time that the city must accept its share of regional growth. the most sensible way to do it is in high-density environments like this. we are the heart of a region of what is nearly 8 million people. the sustainable community strategy projections is that --

asking the city to accept 16% of the regional job growth and about 13% of regional housing growth. for the heart of a region of 8 million people, that does not seem like a lot. but it is 175,000 jobs and 81,000 housing units. over a 25-year period. this plan allows us, i believe, to except that growth in a part of the city where it makes the most sense. it allows us to except a substantial part of that growth in a way that does not affect lower density neighborhoods and is not -- and does our part. we really do believe that office capacity is needed in the city. the city has spent a decade creating substantial housing capacity in high-density

neighborhoods. we need to do something about office capacity because we are reaching a point where we are reaching the capacity for new office development. remember, it is interesting, because of the zoning right now, 80% of the city is owned for industrial use. that is a very small percentage. the city has the same number of jobs as it had in the 1980's. it is largely because of the jobs that were lost to heavy manufacturing were replaced by jobs in the downtown offices and in medical services and institutions. that is why the market has supported a loss of that shift -- has supported millions of square feet of office space during that time. because of that, there is limited capacity for additional

growth. it is also worth mentioning the discussion we have been happening about the types of office users. we have been talking a lot about firms that want to be in the city, but did not want to be in a downtown high-rise. that is playing out in south of market right now with a lot of the tech companies. that is the basis for why we are doing this plan to focus on that type of use. it is also clear that there is a market for both. when we look at cities and other parts of the country right now, seattle, chicago, new york, there is a substantial amount of high rise office growth going on right now. decisions like salesforce, part of the reason they wanted to be downtown was because of the adjacency to transit. that was very clear in their decision making process. we believe there is a

substantial market for downtown high-rises, as well as the lower rise, larger floor space buildings that some technology companies are looking for. the plan addresses the issue of historic districts and landmarks. the preservation commission yesterday and initiated action to expand the conservation district, the new second street montgomery preservation district, and initiated landmarking of several buildings in that area. i think it's fair to say, this plan creates what i think is a better skyline. this is a side benefit of what we're talking about. the city's skyline is benched out at a point at about 600 feet. if you look at our skyline and

its relationship to the typography, i believe san francisco skyline is unique in terms of its being a mound of white towers on that hill that is quite distinctive. it accentuate that form by raising the height and the center of that amount -- mound to aid the state -- a position that is more distinctive than it is today. finally, we are creating a much improved and much-needed street scape environment. it is far more firmly to pedestrians, and 11 acres of new open space. in this part of town, that has not kept pace with development. the sidewalks are inadequate, there is no public open space in this part of town. this has been a big part of the discussion and plan for this area is to make sure we are widening sidewalks, creating the connections, and making sure the

open spaces and the streetscapes reflect the importance of this district. the sheer number of people will be walking on the streets. i do believe this is the right place and right time for this plan. we have struck the right balance between the benefits of creating a new district with some of the impacts, such as transportation, in a way that continues to make the city a dynamic place. it's a building will come before you, as they always have, and we will -- and will present its own set of challenges to the department, the commission, and the public. we will be able to analyze it in the context of this larger planning effort. unless you have questions, i will turn it over to joshua. he will go over some of the questions you had last time.

as well as the approvals we are asking you to take. >> good afternoon, commissioners. the director reminded you of the schedule. yesterday, we were here at the historic preservation commission, which initiated certain actions related to article 11 and conservation districts. today, we are here to initiate general plan, the planning code, and zoning map amendments. we will be back here on the 24th. after that, the commission will again hear their items for auction recommendation to the board of supervisors. today, we will cover a couple of items. the commissioners brought up last session, on the 19th.

the first is a little bit more detail on our growth and office demand issues. i will provide a few more numbers to bob illustrate the points. some this -- to help illustrate the points. the shadow analysis that was done on the future buildings, bo b is here to provide some detail on the schedule and funding for the transit center in downtown rail extension project. let me back up to walk you through the various items before you. in terms of growth, the director talked about the sustainable community strategy numbers. i have drawn up. some of the numbers in terms of department analysis.

these numbers have involved a bit over the last couple of years. -- evolves a bit over the last couple of years. when we did this analysis three or four years ago, we looked at a couple of different scenarios. continued growth as generally trended and the past. others, it was a more smart growth approach. of the 170,000 jobs the director mentioned, a majority of those, over half are likely to be office jobs. we are likely to see 100,000 office jobs in the city in the next 25 years. that translates to a substantial amount of space. it would represent about a third increase of the city's current office staff. this represents maintaining the city's existing share of regional jobs.

it does not represent an increase. it is holding steady, which is a fairly aggressive policy driven luck that the region is helping to shape. -- policy-driven block of the region is hoping to shape. what those numbers mask is a growth of office jobs. the decline of the heavy manufacturing sector. it has manifested downtown. the job picture is on the rise, i'm sure you've all seen the news of the past couple of years. in doing this analysis, we parsed the numbers for there to see how much of those jobs would

tend to be downtown. that would be a subset of the total picture. in a smart growth scenario, we would estimate over 20 million square feet of office space would be needed in the broader downtown area to accommodate the growth that is projected. again, only 12% of the city's land even allows office space at all. in much of those areas, office space does compete with other uses. as opposed to 80% of the city, which is zoned for housing. we currently have a small share of the city to work with in order to accommodate these regional projections. even within that, looking at the area where we do allow jobs in the downtown, south of markets, we have an increasingly constrained potential development sites remaining. the transbay district being one

of the largest concentrations of development space in the area. this plan seeks to take advantage of that. because of its proximity to the major regional transit. and then we further look to see if this is the general production cut 20 million square feet of office space, what is the capacity to absorb this? we looked at the zoning capacity of the area. we try to project out of a certain percentage billed as offices, billed as housing. -- built as offices, billed as housing. what it showed was that we have about half of the capacity under current zoning to absorb this 20 million square feet of office space.