square feet or more per site and provide the larger office that people want now that they require to do some level of office so that we can make sure that this is a draft location rather than a housing location. we also have an entertainment sud from 4th to 6th south of brand. a few partials to include things like hotel utah and other uses near there and make sure that they are permitted ongoingingly. we also want to remove the restriction on large hotels, right now this district, nuo has a restriction up to 75 and only do a hotel up to 75 raols and to do that we need a conditional use and conversations with the

community especially with ti co and we heard that the hotels are the great neighbor and they are 24-7 and so, we propose to remove that cap and instead allow hotels as of right up for 75 and above 75, still require a conditional use. and we also want to make sure that we are nurturing neighborhood retail environments along fourth straight. there is something about an nc district that allows for a fine grain and, fine tuning district that you want in your neighborhood which is what we love about our neighborhood commercial districts and the good thing about the district is that you can't have

commercial specifically stores on the bottom and the residential above. which probably makes less sense in this part of soma so we want to come up with some kind of hybrid and fine tuned retain on the ground floor and allow the office use up above. >> finally we want to talk about the potential for having no housing in the area that is currently zoned the salaries from 4th and 6th. from soma. we recognize that the potential can conflict with the entertainment and push out smaller commercial uses. moving forward and we can continue the conversations making sure that we are covered for the environmental and we can have the conversation with the community over the next couple of years. so another issue that came up that i could probably think about, which was too long for tonight but very important to

us is a potential displacement. we want to work onthies you, and all of the time with the nad and ssa on how to provide for more space in the areas and there is actually more demand for the pdr use and they are all locally serving except for this boom in the manufacturing which is an amazing thing. and so, we hope that we can have a package some time this summer of all kinds of zoning tools that can support the pdr uses and speaking to this neighborhood, under the central corridor plan and there are about 1800 pdr workers that are in the zoning district that would lose the prediction, and i would like to say that these

neighborhoods allow retail and they are less protected then say in the districts that don't allow districts. that is 3 percent and in construction and wholesale and there is the swinerton is technically pdr and particularly in the office building in this neighborhood so we have statistics and it blurs the line of who these workers ares and based on the analysis of the kinds of uses that are in soma about 60 percent of these workers have less than a bachelor's degree. and about 1,000 workers that don't have a bachelor's degree working in the pdr jobs and. and hiring will yield about 5,000 jobs for people without a bachelor's degree, there is a lot more jobs come for the people without the degrees, from these offices. and that being said, we

recognize that there is a hardship for the pdr and the workers, we hope that the businesses have a soft landing and more protected. we hope that other workers can take advantage of job training programs if necessary and we are doing the special work with the flower mart and how to continue in the location as part of the larger development and to move to the bay view to co-locate with the produce mart. let's move on to heights.. so here the base line heights, trying to blow it up so we can see more what the colors mean, straight forward and it is downtown and it is 65 to 85 feet largely along most of the major streets and most are 82 and a half feet wide. and so, that is kind of the golden ratio of building heights used street, and they are lower in the alleys and along the freeway and they are loeg in the valley.

so what have we here with regard to height? >> we are generally support for higher height, south, and we have a certain that the major opportunities are not being adequately up zoned and we also have the support for the lower zones along allies and the other open spaces. so here, the proposed height limits, and basically it tries to make a more uniform street with a 65 to 85 feet along the streets unless you have a building height. and you continue to low and the heights maintaining along the alley and reduces the heights for the open spaces near the car michael school and gardens etc.. we also have the height reductions that are on the fourth side of fourth street, and tgrowth areas there are rise buildings up to 130 feet and that is when we start to

move from that from pink to the kind of warm magenta color and one change that we have seen that we need to add to the map is there is a 200 foot on the side of a parking lot on harrison. probably the best way to tell what this means is this match here, which shows, the changes in heights. so the biggest thing that jumps out is that the reduction in height that we are doing to probably over generously heights and those are going to be high heights, and so we just reduced them a little bit. taking away those, we can see a mixture of light, blues, pinks and moving to the darker colors, the darker colors are closer to the transit in the south west corner. and you know, even put more on the cal train station. so, any way that is what to digest, and you can show the amount of gray area and shown that we are not changing heights in all that many

locations. we also have a higher height alternative that we will be studying in the eir and this was created to emphasize the key locations with the additional height and addressing the concern. and to also reflect the projects that have already submitted a project for planning or a preliminary project assessment and we have greater heights only at the southern end of the corridor. and for example, that station might be emphasized to 400 feet instead of 20. puts more of a focus on 5th street by 150 streets on the parcels instead of 130. extended 200 foot height district on second street south to the freeway and again, both of regular height and the higher height alternatives will be analyzed in the eir. here is a map that speaks to the change in heights from existing to proposed to higher height limits, you know, it

takes forever to figure out what the exact differences are, i will just tell you that you will know what the differences are on a handful of sites where there is increased intensity and i spoke to you about the rail stations and the central subway and more towards fifth street. and so this in terms of development what does it mean? we have under existing zoning potential in this area. we have developed a range, assuming about 75 percent built out over 30 years. and so not full and we don't expect every parcel to go, but to give us cushion, 75 percent, and the range also reflects the notion that potentially some of the close to larger sites might consolidate and there is obvious geometry and if those sites consolidated they are likely to go through the office given the economic now. but it is not huge, but that is

where the range comes from. we see that 81, 8300 existing housing units could be built today with no change in zoning, we have 19,000 jobs that could be built. and so in. magenta we have the growth potential based on our proposed plan and so you can see 25 to 100 housing units and 23,000 to 31,000 jobs. and you can imagine that it is not the highest of each of those things, it will kind of be under one scenario the higher if it is the higher residential number it will be the lower job number and individual development sites is going to trade off, don't assume that it is 4100 jobs or 4100 units and 31,000 jobs, if it is 31,000 jobs, it is 2500 units that go for all of the tables below. and so just summing up the growth potential under the existing and the additional under the proposed plan, that is the magenta, and to the

tenth and the 12th floor and housing units and 42,000 to 50,000 jobs and that is the number that you saw in the previous presentation and 60,600 in this potential and the plan. and underneath that in blue, we have the growth potential under the higher heights alternative and you can see that, you know, it is maybe 20 percent more development potential under the higher heights alternative and so we can get to maybe 4600 jobs or, about 36 or 4600 units or 36,000 jobs and what those totals would come to. you can see that this represents about 15 percent of the total planned jobs, or planned units for the city, or about a third of the planned jobs for the city.

and i just want to highlight one last thing is that there was a statement to revisit the area between 5th and 6th. a huge part of this area near the central subway and near the cal train is this location, that is the over lying area between 4th and 6th south of the freeway. and you can see that up to half of the housing units proposed for the central corridor and maybe 60 percent of the jobs go to the central corridor could be built in those areas, so the first row is what the potential is today, very little, development potential and they are mostly in those small parts of western soma that are not industrial right now and that are maybe rezoned by the soma mg but with a change in zoning to have a greater expansion of that potential and we have to turn it over to josh.

>> so i will just wrap up the presentation, and emphasize some of the other finer points of the plan that is being developed to address some of the issues that we talked about in terms of building on the character of the south of market and really making a complete community. so, hearing over the conversation about the urban forms, we have heard a number of things, we have been out talking to folks about their concerns about the growth and new development, one is just you know, a concern about the dominance of the new tall buildings and the effect on the land scapes. and the people pointing to, for instance, the townsend street where one of the large developments that has two towerand very broad and created a wall along that street and a fairly dark and unpleasant environment and so as we are looking at the controls and look forward for the areas with

the taller buildings and taller than say 65, and we are really keeping this in mind and as well. we talked a bit about, people's concerned about weaving some of the fine grained fabric in the diversity of the buildings and the funky mixture of small and large and what can we do to preserve that diversity and moving forward. >> the first obviously is to preserve the historic resources we have the benefit of having the south of market survey completed a while ago, we have identified all of the major resource and identified the opportunity to expand the south end of the district to take in more properties that should be part of that district, and moving beyond the individual buildings how can we preserve and especially those that are outside of some of these districts. we are looking at expanding the

transferable arts program which is right now in the c3 district to include this central corridor area so that historic buildings can sell tdr, possibly not just within this area but to the broader downtown, to, you know, to reap some financial benefits of that the rest of the district would be gaining. and the specifics, as to how much, or what the rules would be set in terms of how much you will be able to sell and how much we will require in the new developments to buy or to be determined by the future study and analysis and conversation over the next 18 months or so and running a number of models and scenarios to see where exactly these levels should be set. in terms of lack of consolidation, this is an ongoing conversation that will be flushed out over the coming many months. we have identified a number of specific black faces in the plan area that you can see

circled on the map that we feel that they really exhibit this really unique pattern of small lots and buildings that we agree would be a shame to just have sort of gobled up and merged and wiped clean for a major new development. in terms of what the controls might be to restrict that is still something that we need to flush out and work on the community on. we have the notion that we will set on the quantitative just limits on how much can be merged and consolidated possibly mixed with some incentives to preserve the existing buildings such as possibly relief from far or fdr requirements for preserving the existing buildings. just another note in terms of getting back to the question of bulk and while we are showing the heights of up to in large parts of the growth area of the plan up to 130 feet, we do recognize and that the appropriate sort of character

and street loss scale that makes it comfortable environment is lower than that, and thes 65 to 85 feet along these south of market streets and so we have already introduced the notion of the plan that to achieve those higher heights we would require significant upper story set backs above the base height of 65 or 85 feet depending on the part of the plan area and that or those are all part and parcel of the notion of the smaller lots that may not be big enough to incorporate the set backs to not have the set backs up to the full height limit on the sites that will allow the taller buildings and there is a handful and we are working on the appropriate bulk limits like we do in all of the plans where we have the taller buildings, initially, we were talking about this issue about a year ago, we had talked about the primarily the building having a smaller for

residential only, after evaluating a little bit more, we seem to allow that the slightly larger plates to allow the high-rises would offer the diversity of the workplace type in the area and we can develop some bulk controls that really work for the landscaper. >> so, there is a number of issues that we pointed to, that really need to be flushed out over the coming many months before the plan comes for adoption. there are very important issues that we care about that the members of the community care about and they are not necessarily essential for the ier which is focused on the big pictures of building heights and the over all development program and land use mix, specifically the use controls, the specifics of the set back rules and the bulk rules and the tdr controls and the lack of consolidation controls and as well as the lack of

guidelines which we will work on identifying the key major sites in the area and some of them are obvious and producing some design guidelines for how the sites ought to be developed. >> so, the public realm, some discorrection of supporting infrastructure of parks and transit streets, we have been working very closely with the mta over the last several months to look at not just the plan but the south of market at large. and to really, figure out how the streets should be designed to support not just the growth that is coming and exists in this area but also city wide needs, the south of market is not the south of market of 30 years ago, this is high density and working environment and the streets need to support that and needs to support the sustainable goals of city and

to get the people out of here. and we then, working with the npa to further assign the concepts for the program for fulsom and howard and the ier for this plan is to look at the redesign for the streets for from second street all the way to 11th street. other streets are getting the eir in with the bounds of this area, which includes third and fourth street. and the concepts for wider sidewalks and the bike facilities and on bryant and har ris streets looking at maintaining sort of the regional function of those streets but looking in addition to widening the sidewalks and improving the accommodation for the surface transit and then brandon street is going to be an important street and it is almost the main street of this new growth area south of the freeway. and looking at a real transformation of that street

and more of just more of a multimodal environment and there is a number of different streets in the area, second, sixth, fourth and fifth and mission that are important of being dealt with through the efforts whether it is mission street is being addressed as part of the studies second and fifth both have projects under way to redesign them. and so, this plan area, is just sort of taking what is coming out of those efforts and moving them forward. >> lastly, open space, very important as we grow, particularly in these parts of south of market that are really deficient in the open space and many efforts are pointing to that and we really took it as a major action of the plan to identify the opportunities for the new open space and we are building on efforts that their communities are engaged on and whether it is the year that we are going to it has identified a number of opportunities and in the area as well as, working

with other agencies and listening to concepts that are coming out of folks like todco. one exciting opportunity that we think is really interesting is the opportunity on a pc owned parcel, it is a street, light yard off of brian street that extends back into the block. and it is you know it may have been an appropriate use when this is a very light industrial area. but, lots of surface a lots of street light poles and the surface is not the best use of this property and provided that we can find and help them find and find the relocation of that facility and that is to remain industrial. and there is certainly open and interested in allowing the property to be converted into a park and may even have an interesting in maintaining some presence on the block for some sort of a sustainable utility

whether it is water or some kind of program to support the district. we see this as sort of a south park west, the location of this possible park, the proximity to the freeway, but we really see this as an opportunity to create a nice protected open space that it is surrounded by active uses and ground floor retail and residences and office space and really like south park is becoming a real important part of the community. we actually engage in the department of public health when the questions about the location came up and they actually gave there quite a good endorsement for the location, particularly as a possible alternative to locating it on a major ar terial which is exposed to a lot of traffic and the safety in terms of the kids running into the street and of course noise which is a important factor, that said, there are

other ideas out there, todcohas developed the ideas on the same block for the arrangement of open space and we will be putting this in the draft plan and describing it in the eir and it is important to note that we do think that this alternative arrangement which involves a complex a range of transactions using public properties and private properties and just the timing with just or may make that concept difficult to achieve. and there is some other open space concepts that we have been engaged on. one on the block, and bound in by fulsom and harrison, where they have a number of buildings and there is community ideas out there about expanding the gardens to take up some or all of that space, or the plan will carry the breadth of the ideas forward to the process so that that can be flushed out in the coming years. so that concludes the substance of the plan, there are other

important aspects which we are not talking about today such as the eco district which is the parallel process going on that will continue to have its own life as well as implementation including impact fees that we can expand on at a later time. just to reiterate the schedule, we are publishing the plan in a couple of weeks and the eir is kicking off with the consultants are now under contract and we hope to have the draft released in about a year but while this time is happening again, there is a number of topics which we mentioned, and if you see the various things to the controls and the design guidelines and the open space that we plan to continue to have an ongoing community dialogue over and one mechanism that we hope to do that is possibly to have monthly roundtables where we invite the public to open sessions where we focus on a specific topic where it is far rules or lack of consolidation

rules and just have these focused kind of open sessions rather than the broad, public workshops where we try to cover everything at once. we have plenty of time from the year to 18 months to hash out these individual issues one at a time with everyone who is interested. we are happy to answer any questions. thank you. thank you. >> let's open up for public comment, john elberny? >> sure. >> commissioners, john, elberny president, the just on that last discussion that relates to this, please insist that the department turn all of those job numbers and last report and this into square footages, or hotel room counts or things that we can actually use.

i have never heard of the 11 million square feet number for the central corridor until today, i have been asking the department staff for that number for 6 months and the most recent number that i heard yesterday afternoon was about 6 million, so i really would appreciate that. and also, their rationale for that being off the jobs and make them put it in a memo and schedule it for discuss here in public so that we can comment on it further. but we have been doing this developing an alternative plan, the community-based plan and a community-driven plan for the south of market because it is our home and not the corridor. and you have a draft, that is what we called our eir draft and we had a deal of the issues of the department with everything that will be relevant to an eir process and there is a lot more to come. what we are trying to do is to make sure that the future of the south of market, the change that is invisitable will

benefit the small businesses and rather than harm them extensively or displace them and we try to avoid or mitigate the consequences and maximize the good posbilities. the one thing of the central premise of our plan that i have yet to convince the department to esspouse is that the community and neighborhood building is equally as important as building office buildings and it is very bit as important and should be dealt with every bit as seriously by the city's proposal. and we want to show you two examples. they are attached to the points. the air rights development at the subway station at fourth and fulsom, to date the only thing that the department has ever mentioned for this site is a small office building, 75000 feet, 13 stories that is as much as the structure can hold.

it is a wonderful site and this is the heart of the senior housing community and it has the most services of any neighborhood in the city and a beautiful winter gardens across the street and as we show here it is possible to develop a senior residence on this site that is such more pom patable with the surrounding neighborhood and the parking staff showed our plaza south concept for the fifth street property and this is the latest version, and it shows you how it can work. and actually the part, on the east side there is no more complicated with the proposal to put together and there are only two property owners and on the west side, the proposed a project that maintained the flower march small businesses rather than much them out of the neighborhood and they are valuable. i would like to have a chance to meet with each of you. >> your time is up. >> in march to discuss these in detail. >> thank you. >> is there further