waiting or partially, we intensifying the existing financial district, the core, the traditional core, swre buildings that are coming to the end of the life cycle. we have a large number of

historically buildings which could take care of tax advantages but those are large, office buildings, square footages in order for them to stay on-line and be viable, something has to happen. from my perspective, there are at least, ten or 15 out dated high-rise buildings in the cod, and the new developers and i hope that they are not offended by what i am saying, but those things are coming to the end of their life cycle. and they are dated building, there are floor plates and two elevator systems updated, seismic codes, and make them come in clearly to the end of their life cycle. we don't even think about it, all that we are doing is moving out and grabbing things and i am seeing right now, the occupation of your discussion on the central corridor, trying to cram new office into areas that might not be as suitable for the office because other things are lacking, but we are

not looking at gross incomprehensive way which looks also, of what is the existing and might need to be reconsidered together, with the ultimate care and capacity of this city, in terms of land, height, density, soils, water, sewer and everything else that comes with it, together projecting the healthy, functioning, 21st century transportation system which supports all of us. >> commissioner antonini? >> just, a couple of final thoughts. the whole issue that was broughting up that increasingly, that speaks to the whole trend, another thing that was brought up, is the population of san francisco, and it is always changing, and the one thing that i am

optimistic about, is in the 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s the family woulds live her their entire life and the children go to school here and generation after generation would stay in san francisco. and we had if there is not a tendency for people having to leave the city for work, i think that you will see more families staying and people staying through the whole generation and maybe that is optimism and cultural and economic diversety, i think that as the new jobs are created we create another economy, for support, which would address the concerns about people without college or high school educations, because

you know, you have the entertainment industry, hospitality restaurants that are going to be neighborhood serving retail and all of these sorts of jobs, would be applicable, to that particular group, it comes to mind that project where we are not considering today, but the hotel on fourth street which will provide employment for a lot of people who will fit that category and it is just a small hotel, but any hotel that has the effect of providing a lot of service, jobs that are connected with it. and also, it was brought up by the commissioner moore about retrofitting older buildings and what is being done with the pacific telephone and ylep at the market square which was the furniture market before and a lot of the older buildings that have storages and elevators and even new floor plates and a lot of those are being worked on

and maybe more will because there is a lot of interesting, some of the older buildings from the 20s and the only thing on transportation, i think that we are going to need to address that really significantly, and we can't have all of the transportation on the existing streets above ground, we will have to have more subways and take advantage of the hills which the previous generations have not and dig the tunnels through them and connect the parts of the city through tunnels and make it easier for the transit to move and not have competition continuously between the cars, buses, pedestrians, on surface streets, trying to minimize that as much as possible >> we are close to the end here. because i have all of the answers. nobody has the specific true right answer. i do see and i will have to highlight some of the things and some of my own thoughts and

you do see a pattern of the appeal of san francisco and a lifestyle, or the people moving to san francisco, many of them who we know, without a job and find themselfs in high cost living area while still searching for jobs for quite a while and i can see that problem for having many in san francisco that are well educated but jobless. i do like the idea of trying to stay pro-active to it and not reactive as we have have in the past. i think that being reactive really helps and stimulates, driving real estate cost really higher because the people are in the panic mode to buy, sell or find themselves places i like the idea of zoning, and i am a believer that even if you zone an area for growth does not mean that it will help in a way and the market will control itself, but it does get out of control but at some point as we

have seen in the last eight years, because of the difficult in getting money it does sort of self-regulate itself and this kind of leads to a larger discussion, probably beyond us, and with the mayor's office of economic workforce development with the jobs and what they are focusing on and what jobs can be created and the sectors that we don't know about yet. and so, i would like to sort of at some point, bring in the other spokes of the wheel to the equation, but, commissioner moore has more questions. would i like to pick up on commissioner wu said displacement and creating a city setting that is more retaining and friendly for families that were required a response to looking at it more comprehensive for me and understanding of the sufficient number of schools, and the children and education at large, community facilities, parks and open space and everything which comes when you have a diverse population,

which is not just the tech people moving in and out and including those stages, but those people ultimately become the cohesive future of the population of the city. >> thank you, commissioners. i appreciate that. i would be happy to continue this dialogue in other forums. i will say a couple of things about, i don't think that there is anybody in here that will question the need for mta to get better. um, i and we are looking close with them, and i am trying to figure that out, i will say that with respect to other parts of the need to have amenities grow with plans, with the development, we are, i mean, as part of the reason for doing these plans, the transit center plan adds 11 acres of open space that does not exist today and i think that commissioner moore with more about the financial district and the trend to the older

buildings is to convert them to housing. and so i do think there is that and i would argue that we are going to see more of that and we are going to as those buildings become the need for those buildings and renovation to come forward we can easily some of them convert to housing as well. again there is no magic answer here. with the office of economic and workforce development and ken rich was supposed to be here and had to be called away. there is also a need to give or to have capacity for more than you actually need to provide some flexibility in the market. so that we are not, so that we are not really maximizing and driving up rents even higher. and now, there are those who knows what that magic number is, but for example, some people say that you should rezone the north part of the bay view, but that is not what this is all about, the question is how much above the demand should we zone for? there should be some flexibility there, recognizing

the projects don't move forward and that the things, that allows the market some flexibility, in pricing, and on locations that is kind of what we are looking at here too. >> commissioner moore? >> i would like to share one thought with you and that comes up a lot in planning and city, for me. the one thing that we are always advising the cities and developers to do is avoid the leap frog development which is describing the opportunity side and increase the speculation and i do believe that we are showing minor signs of speculative, or real estate speculation here as well. because i think that ultimately in order to build a cohesive city and district by district and maximize transit investment where it is and rather than randomly expanding out to where it isn't.

i think that mr. (inaudible) would also need to make sure that the amount of entitlement which is not realized is not so accessive that ultimately you are not out zoning yourself, because you are unable to fill the 15 million square feet, where you are onlier absorbing $750,000 a year. the leap frog is that it is not creating the economic efficiency that you are thinking about. >> thank you. >> i hope that we can continue to have this conversation, and similar conversations i think, it is a great forum here. >> thank you. >> likewise. >> commissioners final item, number 1 4 for the central

corridor plan, updates. >> john, for the department. i'm going to start this presentation and staff will continue it. the details, i'm just giving an overview about where we are and what we are doing here. just to remind you, the central corridor plan, study area is bond by the market street on the north and townskend on the north and second street on the east and as you recalled it is back to the eastern neighborhood plan, very late in that planning process, this area was covered or most of that area was covered in that planning process and we made the decision fairly late in that process to not rezone that area. and to take a fresh look at it. and the central corridor, and the central subway, i should say and partially what this is about.

so there are key goals of the plan, and one is to support city-wide objectives for transit growth, particularly workplace growth to build on the character of what makes south of market attractive. and i will thank john for kind of steering us on the right course on that and making sure that we are not talking about a new high-rise district here but what we are talking about is the south of market with the high-rises. we will improve the ground and provide the supporting infrastructure. there are four diagrams that i will speak to quickly and i can speak to the kind of jist of the plan and one is that we have tried to identify the key assets and the neighborhood characteristics, there is a broad range of the destinations on this street. and fourth street is essentially the becoming of the main street and we are trying to reinforcement that and there is a number of older buildings

and great architecture that we are trying to address through our residential on claves and there are also several blocks that we are trying to maintain. and so what that results in is that when you look at the potential opportunities for growth. and it really is in these darker red areas, which is a fairly small part of the over all study area that we are looking at fairly small area to increase the densities. importantly, the reason that we are not seeing the north part,

it is zoned in c3, and the elements and that is not changing what i am proposing in the zoning in the northern part of the sight, near where the transit site exists of course. this shows to protect the key assets and identifying the force as a major corridor kind of a main street and require the ground, floor retail, areas where we will restrict a lot more areas where we would it leads us to this diagram that we have the potential in some areas and higher growth in the south west corner of the sight

it is a small part to increase the development potential. and with that i will turn it over >> we have been seeing the plan for two years now and it is largely interesting, and the bursting ideas and feedback and refining and starting all over again and that is what we are doing for two years and we are hoping to release, in a couple of weeks, the document of the draft plan and start the eir, so that this is moving forward. to talk about 16 months.

to hopefully be back in front of you for 2014, for adoption and we will hopefully with these issues to discuss today. we talk about all of the lifting that we have done, and it is important to point out that, we have met with practically with as men groups as we could find and we did not just say, hey come to us, we went to them and we looked up the groups and called them, invite us to your already organized meetings so we can have greater attendance and we have been here now four times and we have walking tours and we had a storefront in the community, where the people could come in and talk to us. to talk about the remaining

issues that we have with the traffic force and we have various conversations with mta about the comprehensive look, and not just for this plan but for all of soma and for the eco districts and for the proposed park site that we are going to talk about. this is the existing land uses in soma, i think that it was referred to, it is all of the colors that you could have. so here is the base line conditions, the zoning will slightly psychedelic and we have 19 different zoning districts and they are already in the existing zoning and assuming the adoption of the western soma which is in front

of the board right now. and the zoning and which is south of the harrison, and the blue sli and the kind of gold colored and all of those districts are flexible, we have c3 which allows anything, and the nuo, districts and all residential and to some degree, office and retail and pdr and all of the diversity that can happen in these areas. we want to increase south of harrison and allowing a diverse of areas and larger hotel and nurturing of neighborhoods in retail cluster and we have heard disagreement and the housing lot in the south west portion of the planning area

and the forming of the retail and the viability that you need to preserve and protect in the arts in this area. we have 11 districts here and maybe most of the area is moved to to the existing zones and industrial areas, and so harrison, and in the zoning and they are going to change the capacity in the harrison. south of harrison, and the fla and the district that currently allow residential or office. and the in addition to the salary that is along the freeway. on the zoning we have the sud, south of harrison, that would support, the large sites, and job providers and we feel that we can detail and we have been