practices like in the fillmore that wouldn't have been tolerated or aloud or encouraged anywhere else in san francisco. and one of the reasons why i think that an area like the fillmore in the western edition i think was underresourced and somewhat subverted in the ability to decide for themselves because, again, they were under a different governance of land use for the large part being redeveloped. and one of those consequences was that in the corridor of fillmore, south of -- or south opposed to gary, moving through the western edition, you could have a store front, retail in the mixed use and commercial corridor where you can put an office right there in there. now, one would think in a commercial corridor like ours you would have some kind of retail space, restaurants, place

to dine perhaps, place to shop. on the east side of the fillmore corridor, we had that. on the west side of the fillmore corridor for many blocks we do not. because the property owner who decided that they wanted to lend it out and lease it out to the social security office which had it for many years or to a clinic which is fine, clinics being there and they want to be there and what they were doing, in my opinion, playing with who could pay the kind of dollar they were looking for and subverting the potential of there being more vibrant retail access in that particular area. and so right now especially since the waning days of redevelopment and since january 2009, there has been a vigorous effort to get more business in the fillmore corridor south of gary and it's coming. and i do not want to see the businesses that my office and

the office of economic work force development and others who are hunting and trying to recruit to come down to have this very lopsided, uneven kind of total quality when people are there to shop and to dine and all of a sudden they're walking

past two or three swatches of blocks and it's office space. it makes no sense. in union square there is no way we would tolerate this. if there was some store front retail and they go out of business and i don't think necessarily it would comport with the retail unity and business community of union square that the immediate reflex would be, well, we need to certainly get that building leased and occupied and we don't want it to be boarded up so let's turn it into an office p unheard of. so why would we do that to a neighborhood merchant corridor, especially one that is struggling to return a flavor that makes it a cultural destination site. so i have done similar things and we have things like the sodero and the comeback kid story and great things have happened. so why less than a mile away, less than a mile, maybe half a

mile, would we not provide that same right to the fillmore as we would to union square and others? and that is before you our legislation. and it is more perspective not to evict anybody that is now but should there be that turnover, in the future of those offices and that no longer have the releases -- or the leases are coming up for expiration, and we turn back, excuse me, to a retail purposes and restaurant purposes. and there's only several vacancies right now that are on the west side. and we are very happy to report that they are now being slated to be restarting this summer and early fall. and so very few remain and the ones that are going to be nonretail in the three block areas are the very buildings that are the impact question of this ordinance. so be more than happy to answer any questions. president olague: thank you. i know a couple of commissioners have their names up so i'm going to do that before going to public comment or? any questions? >> commissioner, i would like to expand on the point supervisor mirkairmi stated in "the chronicle" that said businesses would be evicted when the leases expire and as you know that is not correct. land use entitlements are granted not to individual businesses but the property at hand. if the property has an entitlement for office use and they are exchanging to another office use, they could do so if they dent need to expand or do any intensification.

and so it would make the office uses nonconforming and we would like to see them convert, but nobody would be forcibly evicted with the adoption of this ordinance. president olague: thank you for clarifying that. i spend a lot of time walking along that block because i live in the vicinity and there is a need to be revitalization and many ways what that area has the seen. one of the concerns i had is the number of formula retailers in that block. so is there mowd engaged or i don't know who is engaged to the top and local business people? if you don't mind. >> that is another gift of urban

renewal. in a redevelopment jurisdiction, there were no formula retail restrictions. so in the fillmore corridor, we have the highest concentration of fast food restaurants because it was encouraged as the enterprise and strategy by the redevelopment agency throughout the 70's and 80's to let them land there and in a one or two block radius i will have an mcdonald, a domino's pizza, a panda express, a subway station, a subway sandwich shop and others within a two-block radius because the goal wasn't necessarily using a mom and pop, but it was bringing in that retail experience in my opinion and it was very short sighted. we are living with the consequences of that. my response to that now is restrict from that happening and i know that might cause consternation with people who think you are not supposed to mess with capitalism, but it is completely undermines the global

economy for people who live in the area and want to invest in the area and stays and we tried it for 45 years under redevelopment. and now let's try it a little differently as we would in another neighborhood and i can show you where the successes have worked and nearby and it's also north of gary on fillmore and that is the upper fillmore and the mid to upper fillmore corridor. they're not treated the same way as the mid to lower fillmore is because redevelopment jurisdiction stopped at suter. and so when suter and fillmore south, you can see the compl marketable difference of what land use zoning contrasts were in that area. and it's between gary and suter on fillmore that you have been able to intervene but it makes you wonder then if you can see the fast food infusion to burger king was right there and so you can see the happenstance way the

planning had occur and now it is time to bring former redevelopment corridor to the largest former redevelopment tract up to continuity with san francisco planning code. the first step in doing so is this ordinance. president olague: thank you for your work on this. >> thank you. pleasure. president olague: any other questions from the supervisors -- >> didn't i see you in the burger king the other day? >> with a plastic bag. commissioner miguel: supervisor, thank you for coming. appreciate what you are doing on this. i had a question about some of the uses that would be

prohibited. i know on west porthole we have ground level medical and dental uses and other type of uses and we have and i would assume that financial would be categorized separately from office. is that correct? >> financial being? >> banks or other financial institutions. >> so they're fine. and there are some where you do have some selective medical uses and i know a movie theater would be disallowed which i am not sure anyone is going to go and put a movie theater but it might not be the worst use. >> are you kidding? i encourage that, but that would be over -- >> yeah, it was listed as a number of things that would be prohibited. but not limited to. >> not prohibited. >> maybe my paperwork is not accurate. but noticed that one. board boa commissioner borden: i think this is spot on and most people stop at gary and turn around and don't continue down the street and farmers' market is a huge

success. and i know you have been working with urban solutions and one of the things they go do is focus on the fillmore and have you talked to them about the legislation and how it might be helpful? >> i talked to them about four years ago as i was gearing up for the conclusion of the redevelopment era on fillmore because i have been used that pulpit in my office to draw attention to the fact that recently with the lead and commissioner sugaya was there in japantown to show the connection and the disconnection of what gary boulevard did to segregate western addition fillmore from ja pantown and i think that it is the proper term to call ate berlin wall and we would talk to urban organizations and to knit back the vitality that was once shared both communities and the japanese community and the

african-american and the working class community were very strong in the 1post 40's after what ha been done to the japanese community. but had been refortified for some years until redevelopment subverted and now we're looking for ways to bring that together. so it's incremental. in fact, there is a corner building where the japantown bowl used to be at 1600 western. another travesty that reminds us every day that it was replaced with 42 condo units, not really affordable, and decimated the japantown and it's always remained vacant since that building has been established because the redevelopmental law allowed that to be vacant. it is retail and remained vacant since the 42 units were developed and it is an insult to the japantown community and the rest of san francisco and there's never been a compelling authority that has made sure that that space be occupied because we don't have that kind of vacancy law to do so. that was another gift of urban renewal gone wrong. and so we are trying to line

this up between fillmore and upper fillmore and into japantown and throughout the western edition to modernize land use so it is more in sync with planning code. commissioner borden: i think this is great and to ask you guys to work on a credit union or a bank in that area and the check cashing place but not a lot of real banking options for the vimmings in that area -- for the individuals in that area. it is unfortunate because people would over utilize the check cashing services. >> i completely agree to commissioner antonini that i would rather put a credit union, but to afford in san francisco is agencies that are held responsible and were in poor communities is i don't care what kind of economic infusion. and give them more cash checking places, give them more fast food restaurants, give them more chain stores in this regard and while that may look good on the front lines because something is seen as being established, it

purports to be hiring people locally or whatever the case is, but in the long run it does not have that kind of benefit back into the community. and there is a lavatory that proves this and that is in the western edition. commissioner borden: i am 100% supportive and think this will go a long way in having a more active business community and the challenge with up thor fillmore and one of the reasons they have fought against formula retail to engage the stores in the local community in participating in the different street walks and events and we look forward to being able to support bringing that area back. >> it's all about balance. president olague: commissioner moore. commissioner moore: supervisor, and as this becomes a model for redevelopment proceeding in

other areas and this paves the way for us to re-examine how to heterofit. the problem i'm wondering if that was done for you and redevelopment brought with it oversized buildings and necessarily don't replicate or implicate the surrounding development and created massive renewal without the contractual sensitivity and in some cases the ground floor created oversized spaces which were smaller retail or inappropriate and i hope the spaces which we are now rezoning for different kinds of uses have the architectural ability to be subdividable and that smaller entrepreneurial retail can indeed have a successful business and i hope that the people who helped you look at those buildings and that indeed will effect to target the smaller neighborhood retail which we are interested in to create that bridge on the other side of fillmore. >> right. the answer is yes, but i don't have a conclusion because there is no master plan in dealing with it. and i suggested to the

predecessors in anticipation of redevelopment exit, i think there should have been an area wide plan of japantown and of the western addition. there was literally no exit plan and you almost have to treat it like when the military base closures occurred throughout the united states during the and after the clinton administration and local governments and regional governments were preparing for that sort of evacuation of property before it was transferred back to local and regional government. we never did that here. so we're now not only trying to address these things block by block, and codes need to unite between sdi code and what was -- between city code and what was under redevelopment's prism and preparing for the business model of enterprising people who might get a leg up in a corridor like the fillmore. but there is literally no plan for that at all. commissioner moore: and i am particularly interested in hearing you speak to that because we are in the middle of

re-establishing new redevelopment projects of rather significant size and finding the balance between redevelopment and proper city governance that is for me the big question mark because we're still operating and moving into the future and looking at two forms of governance. >> well, to me to be honest with you're welcome and this is the conversation i would dig getting into but would take a long time, but quite frankly, other than the redevelopment agency commission having this discussion -- >> i think we need to other. >> is a real miss that it's not being heard in city hall because we often have parallel government and with all the -- i think with all the effort by governor brown and others in the metmore sis or is elimination, nobody is talk about reform except director blackwell is trying but try to envision levels of reform that were at the policy juncture and perhaps

influencing right now. having that is difficult. and i would, for example, say god forbid how it should be an infrastructure like this. and that is just a side note. it would be a step in the right direction. i have more faith in the bayview project area of redevelopment that will be wise enough to not make some of the mistakes they did in the fillmore and japantown and hoping it will be wise enough to think three to four decades ahead that you have an exit plan in knowing what it means to have the areawide government system by a two-year municipal government system. what most realize is that the foilmore was -- the fillmore was occupied in a completely different land use model than the rest of san francisco for all those years. people in the western addition had no idea and would be implementing at city hall and city hall would say we're handcuffed because redevelopment

agency goes through state law and they couldn't understand why they couldn't get redevelopment response. that is a whole new sort of organizing tactic for people to understand how to access local government and not just to assess the planning and go to redevelopment and do it there, too. >> commissioner miguel? commissioner miguel: i am appreciative of what you were talking about and the gas club venues that i was used to started in the late 50's and 60's to disappear and they were not replaced by any active situation bd to an extent they were the late afternoon and

nighttime and weekend part of the district basically where i learned jazz and some of the indication of the willingness of people to get rid of the situation that you are trying to get rid of has been the only in the last several years that the fillmore street annual jazz festival has extended past gary. for years it ended at gary and it never crossed four, five years ago. and now it that has, it works it proves that it works. and so the dwo people of the area there are trying to get ahead of what went wrong and the legislation is great and we appreciate it. >> when we came into office, we had the second highest homicide

rate in the city and second or third highest and 20 yearses previously and the highest drop in violent crime in our area and the city holding steady for two years and there are definitely areas of concern and some time, but we pounce on it and the first thing was to try to arrest any of the public safety issues so that it would lend confidence to the merchant corridor and the people who live in the area and want to come into the area. it is a great place to be. one of the most historical places of san francisco, unlike anything else west of the mississippi. it was the epicenter of the african-american community and where the japanese-american community is and not fair what has been done but something we can go to help with the grievances of the past in little ways and this is just that little way. president olague: we have one more commissioner who would like to weigh in. commissioner sugaya. commissioner sugaya: i was reminded in a comment about the j-town bowl and the replacement structure has retail space on the bottom that has not been leased for a long time -- >> been rebuilt.

>> right. and in the walking tour it was pointed out that the koern property or corner retail space will be a dental office. and that was done while it was still under redevelopment agency's jurisdiction and i think now probably would not be allowed or maybe it would be. i don't know the exact zoning for that and this is the concern of the supervisors and the community and those on stour and a key retail space is a dental office and that is a concern to everybody. >> it would not be included, but if you want to add an addendum,

i would be happy to support it. commissioner sugaya: maybe we'll recommend that. commissioner antonini: supervisors, i wanted to add on the other use and the small office and sometimes the professional might be appropriate depending on their size and i see you have restricted the depth and size of these and come to where they are appointments and go to the retail and i know there is a lot of va can sis and unfortunately many of the filling places can't do anything that and to think about a way to craft it narrowly and with the medical professional offices and not bring in things that would not keep the area vibrant. and many retail will close at 6:00 or 7:00 anyway as do many

of the business and professional offices which is something to think about. >> and post redevelopment and down the corridor is restaurants and restaurants and areas that go past #:00 p.m. and i can't tell you if it will have the desired effect and there is room for more in that area. >> and something you utilize the up floors and other uses and restaurants cannot and there is plenty of vacancy. >> okay. and not below the store front and i don't want to replace anybody. i want it all for the community, but i believe it has to be proportionally zoned to have it that way. commissioner antonini: 1300 fillmore very, very good and a lot of other ones a quite good.

president olague: thank you for your time. >> appreciate it. we have one speaker card. tom? >> thank you for bringing this forward and giving us an opportunity to work with you. i'm the executive director of livable city ands that a great illustration of the reason why we need controls on building form and building use and last year there was an ordinance that extended these to the residential commercial districts and mixed use districts to say

on the ground floors we want building forms that create transparency and visual interest, etc., to try to do the tall commercial ground floors and have a lot of glass and transparency and the human scale and may not be the norm uses if you have residential uses and you have individual entrances meeting the street, et. and that is a revolution and this is a separate question. if you walk down that stretch, the store fronts are attractive and even with doors but they have been given over to uses not appropriate on the ground floor. and to be blocked up or papered up and everyone is gone at night and there is a no man's land later on and this would restrict the uses to a smaller group of uses and love the can having about redevelopment. i think we should have one planning code and every redevelopment area should use the planning code and at 5:00 when you talk to the people you ask why aren't they using the

planning code and we ran into the problem over and over again to re-integrate some 40-year-old planning document back into the planning code and continuing to grow and evolve and a great conviction and we probably don't need two commissions and you should take over redevelopment. >> i agree. >> we like the staff recommendations in terms of the other self-service and ask for another amendment to this which is the limitation on specialty food service and uses being at -- anyway, limited to 10 and this is the bakeries and calf face and serve some of it on sight and limited to 10 period. and we are wondering these are great businesses that employ people in the making and great uses and to create vision to the ordinance and get rid of the limitation and we're not quite

sure why the bakeries have to be limited and 10 is fine. and so if you consider stretching that line from the definition of the specialty food service, it would be great and goes in the direction and the other ordinances in terms of creating the secretscape. president olague: and if you can stick around for the discussion, some might have questions for you. >> public comment is closed. >> i'm going to make a motion. president olague: i'm sorry. did you want to speak? i didn't notice that. i'm going to let them. there are a few people who want to speak to this. >> i amgen manager of fillmore center and we're all for vitality and traffic coming into

the fillmore but we oppose the use of restriction on the first floor. right now it would be hurtful if all the vacant store fronts had just right now there's no rating list on boutiques and restaurants and store there is and we don't want to restrict. we don't want to restrict the use of the first floor. thank you. >> thank you if any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner shug sugaya.

commissioner sugaya: i was going to make a motion to recommend approval with conditions if that is the right term. >> i'm second. commissioner sugaya: and just like to have staff take a look at -- we can't extend this because this is nc-3 but i think ja pantown if i can make it out here is nc-2 and i don't know if -- i assume because it got done, so to speak, under redevelopment that the approval is already there and interesting to note it's not in a dental office and is allowed and unrestricted at this point and report back at some point and interested in considering what tom said with respect to whatever specialty retail and maybe there's a reason for that. >> the staff did consider that request and this commission