is the quarter of a block that has a lot of growth opportunity and at the center, unfortunately, has a lot of owned by the public utilities commission that as a street light yard and more or less an open parking lot. we feel that the repurchasing of this property and to moving the street light yard to a more appropriate place in the city is something that we have looked at. we have been in conversation for a few months already and we're optimistic we can work with them to make something happen here. like south park, this will be a real jewel of the south of market protected from the traffic and all-around with small alleys and an opportunity to create a park with adjacent development. part of it is really engaging with other city agencies and

stakeholders to look at opportunities, to take advantage of development happening in this district to do something of a district scale. there certainly are city-wide programs and buildings the civic programs, but very resource intensive and much longer proposition to do things at a city wide scale. there would be many facets, public realms. but the energy and water and waste programs that we have been focusing on, there is an interagency working group that will help form including to the department of the environment, the department of public works, we have a meeting about the district for a few months about and has been taking some important steps forward.

at this point, the district team feels it is important to start reagin private property owners and development of his and other interested community members to perform what will be called the sustainability management association. that is something created by cities in portland. it will create a steering committee, if you will. there is a meeting planned for august 16 that is going to be held at noon. we have already put out announcements for that inviting the community, and stakeholders will learn more about the district and hopefully bring key players for this management association. last is the funding implementation for all of the aspects of the plan. of capital improvements that include streets and open spaces

as was the programmatic aspects including affordable housing, work force development preservation and sustainability. we created this matrix to show how we have been talking about meeting these needs from potential sources. there are planned revenues and requirements. there are and will continue to be this area covered by the eastern neighborhoods impact scheme. we would continue to perpetuate that, but the eastern neighborhood structure has multiple tiers based on what kind of zoning laws adopted will probably have to add a fourth because we are considering rezoning a little more intensive than in the eastern neighborhoods. in terms of affordable housing, like with a thick neighborhoods

and properties that were industrial only and would be allowed to do housing and other issues, we will also apply to enhanced inclusion their requirement for all of those properties. that would be able to do housing in the future. hosts we have done some initial calculations. we believe there is the potential to raise between 130 and $200 million. the public realm program of the area would cost somewhere in the order of 110-$120 million. we think there is potential to generate a surplus of furred not just this immediate plan area, but the broader south of market. there is general economic

benefit costs to see the general services the would be demanded verses the tax revenue and others that can be generated. we think there'll be a surplus of $600 million over 20 years from the revenues generated vs. the cost. that concludes the presentation. we're entering the environment to review phase and we hope to have consultants on board by the end of the summer so we can start in earnest in the fall. everything you have seen will be part and parcel with the product description analyzed. we hope to publish an actual draft plan document that contains the information we presented in a full narrative and a policy framework. we're happy to answer any questions. we have lots of background

documents and everything available on our web site for anyone that wants to see more, including the presentations made to the public workshop last week. >> opening it up for public comment. the speaker cards? >> mr. president, members of the commission, i was struck listening to the last presentations between the items nine, 10, and 11. you mentioned that it was more of a mixed in, and a mixed use neighborhood, and more entertaining part of the city. what we're hearing today from the strategy in the central quarter plan combine what we know, there is no question that mid market is becoming a mixed use and a mixed income neighborhood.

some of the small businesses and restaurants will stay. there will be cheaper restaurants for residents, and the collective bargaining agreement will bring focus resources of the most vulnerable residents. but the challenge you have is how to employ that what you heard in the central market economic strategy, a policy to prevent displacement. the most likely vehicles are the converging existing housing. there will be diverted into condominiums and student housing. through condo conversions and what you'll be talking about of the next item, but these uses themselves are not bad. it is a good thing not only for its own right but it reduces the pressure to convert existing residential. the mean either new construction

or converting commercial buildings to these uses. but if we cannibalize the existing housing stock, we're going to displace thousands of the most vulnerable families and seniors. you have a lot to say in how we can incentivize new construction had discouraged the conversion of existing housing. a small example was what you heard a minute ago. preserving the smaller buildings that often house the smaller residential buildings in the alleys. and we will talk in a few minutes about other ways you can discourage the conversion of existing housing. >> in the afternoon, commissioners. i came here for the next item but can't resist the opportunity. a couple of observations.

if we are genuinely serious about preserving small lots because they contribute to the character of the neighborhood and the quality of life of the residents, it is probably going to be startlingly unsuccessful in the long haul unless there are some very, very strong criteria established of fraud. i would urge you to go towards a band of the merger is if you are serious about preserving small lots. it sounds good, but i have seen a lot of them turned down on a lot of topics as necessary and desirable. it is an incredibly weak and a flexible standard. the second thing i want to raises a point of concern, the removal of space in this city for light manufacturing or for

manufacturing and production. everyone knows manufacturing is no more in this country. at the civic center, phillips's marketing one of their bulbs at a higher price because it is made in the west. i talked to another lighting company based in the city where the manufacturing plant is, and they talked about their partnerships with companies up and down california and how that is valuable. i looked at the various high- tech industries in the bay area and the need for small-scale the manufacturing to do prototypes. finally, i looked at some contractors i have been working with. these are folks that really like working with their hands. they do a fine job and are extremely skilled. this is not a laborer that comes in off the street that once a

but. there is not a lot of space for craftsmen because there is not a lot of space for skilled manufacturing for creative manufacturing. it is a real opportunity for san francisco. i know that it really cuts and a property tax revenues because housing is so much more valuable. but having a range of job opportunities in the city that gives people with different interests and different skills employment opportunities has immense value to the city and is an incredibly strong contributor to the broad quality of life. i don't hear that considered in these discussions were manufacturing is leaving so we will convert manufacturing space to housing and offices.

dodgem good afternoon madam president, mr. president. i have a third-generation san franciscan and i remember when markets tree was a place where families would go to the shot and do everything. i recently traveled over to barcelona. they seemed to have worked out a problem, if you can buy and how both of these projects, you could take all of the streetcars and everything, transfer and then between mission and howard. turn market street into a greater growth from as far west as you wanted to go. another thing, when you guys are talking about them, you missed the boat. it is too expensive to do business here and no one can

afford all of the things that the city has put on these people. take a different look at look at the future where this can be something that would draw world wide attention, a place where everybody would congregate. >> good afternoon, commissioners. three minutes to try to explain all that is wrong with the central corridor plan. how can i do it? i will try. the central corridor is in search of our problem. forestry is already developing into a neighborhood commercial corridor as is often the case with no help from the planning department at all. high-tech offices are finding

plenty of both in south of market and financial district without needing to cannibalize existing service and light industrial space. the central corridor plan represents the spread of downtown offices and high- density residential into an area of totally alien and the incident of this culture. this office of boma unjustified and unquantified is another example of our planning department and jumping onto a bandwagon long after the train has left the station. the result is overinflated property values causing the displacement of thriving, successful uses it in favor of some ephemeral onslaught of twitter and the sales force. and have you checked the value of your facebook stock today.

production, distribution, repair jobs. jobs, jobs, jobs. the wax eloquent about the importance to the city during the easter neighborhood process. to reduce potential as placement from the eastern neighborhood, the city could insure that planning efforts are undertaken to establish hall that used as a priority for other parts of the city including retaining land and building supply. your words. you value the existence, you're just not willing to put your money where your mouth is. the central corridor's expansion is not driven by sowed planning principles or need. it is the result of pressure by

the san francisco chronicle were their printing plant property and a consortium of growers and sit in on land they would like to sell for the highest used possible. western selma provides buildings for this important element of san francisco's and economic diversity. these locations are critical to the city's ability to offer entry-level jobs with upward mobility to the current and future members of the city goes to work force. >> any additional public comment? >> i was just trying to figure out how many of boom and bust cycles i have seen. one of the things we have kept

forgetting and that people at the planning department is forgetting is that we need to keep in place of the diversity small businesses that go through all the store. we went through the office space, the live work and indeed not, booming. if we do not leave real space that we are planning for in the south of market for the businesses that he was talking about, we're not doing good economic planning for the city. i don't care if you let a planning school. i also agree with the conditional use. every what i have seen in the last few years, right a staff report and collect a fee. we have the -- the planning

department should ban the word on transit about how many blocks away. the blocks south of market are four times the length of the blocks north of market. it is really hard to walk the east west block if you only have transit every three blocks because it is a very long high. if you do not have a plan for an intensive and dramatic change to make it possible for people to get around, the only people that will live and work and function here are people young enough to walk or bicycle. families can survive and a what else can survive if they have a disability. i look for the acknowledgement that there needs to be a really intensification of use and when

you put in this much people. the the pattern was based on industrial use. until very recently, we haven't changed anything. the last question is that people need to be honest and up front. what you're doing about the density of housing, the next item, as you get into abolishing housing the limits, you have lots of many units. you'll have more need for open space in the open space in there is really pathetic. people that live in small units really need a public spaces hot side just to be civilized and decent. you're open space plan was a big part of south of the freeway had is not going to really help anybody. >> any other additional public

comment>> good afternoon, commissioners. i am afraid i am on thin ice and quite a contrarian. all to commend the planning staff for the incredible work they did. they have done us every courtesy to show us how this plan has evolved and the work that they did. it did they get it perfect? we would say no, but they could have got higher and added more, and they didn't. it was a very thoughtful job and i should emphasize is forward- looking and not backward looking. to those of the planning staff at thanks to them for presenting us in keeping us surprised. >> any additional public comment?

>> my name is david, i am here with fishermans expire. hopefully you are aware of us, we have been the most active developer in the last decade. we have recently broken ground on foundries were three -- we're trying to get more under way in the future. our newer project is have fifth and brandon, the former property in the central corridor. this is a two-acre parking lot, and we recently submitted eight project application with planning. we're proposing to build an office building here, in a project we think is in line with the controls of the goals of the central corridor plan. we believe it is remarkably in tune with what the market and the neighborhood wants.

there things we hear from tents and residents all the time. the eco district is something that we're looking forward to contributing again. the question these allies have become a resource. it would be an asset and a tool. our only comment on the plan, perhaps a little self-serving, we think it could be higher and more dense. it is adjacent to a real project. we think he can support greater height and density. look forward to participating in the planning and processing applications with the plan into an like to get underway as soon as the plan is adopted. >> the public comment portion is

closed. commissioner antonini: i think this is a very good beginning. at some comments and observations. i don't think anyone would disagree that the area south of market historic plea is entirely industrial and usually very heavy industrial has very wide blocks. virtually no trees. it tends to be real windy, so is not the most pleasant area to be walking around, particularly in the evening. anything we can do to calm the situation where possible, widening sidewalks helps. i haven't heard anything about mid bloc lights were crossings or something to break up some of the streets and make these more discreet hot streets. obviously some of the streets, because of traffic flow, will have to remain in one way and

remained many freeways. traffic has to move somewhere. but many streets as you alluded to can be made a more called him and made a more livable by someone implementing some of these things as is the case further in the area where you are starting to do things along streets like made and others that are being made quieter. also, on this whole question, we talked about this for decades. i think certainly, nobody wants pdr to leave. if we define its or allow areas where you can do housing and you can do office or other uses, parts of the area only makes sense if we do that because

realistically, many uses can't function in san francisco. some do. it was less expensive than having your business in an area with these other uses. there is a happy medium and i think both can survive. nobody said anything about the tracks in the station area where italy will not be any more and that will be of great cite that as part of this plan. we're hoping by 2018 or 19 we will see the completion of the extension to the translate terminal, and we will then, presumably, have area that is available for development and about where the tracks began to go into the tunnel and how much

of that space is made available. a two-way folsom is something we have talked about and i don't know if that will be part of the mix. i think that is something else i see in the plan that makes a lot of sense. finally, a discussion about a small lots should be consolidated. i don't know that you want an outright ban. sometimes developing an area and making it work is necessary and least for ownership purposes to combine these to a single use that can look like a discreet parcels. particularly on very busy streets or the allies -- the alleys and the smaller streets and businesses are going to be ok or development. do have that on a busier street is hard to maintain these 25 ft

parcels and make them discrete entities into themselves even if there is selling for more height. we can certainly make it look as if it is individual parcels to make it more attractive. it doesn't have to be monolithic. that is something that we should look at carefully. the other subjects that i am sure we will get into in the next discussion, the issue of building new housing to supplement what is there already. he was speaking in terms of the earlier discussion. i think also where there are situations where presently, housing units in really bad shape that can be converted into a market rate housing in return for more affordable housing which still would be under the auspices of rent control. some kind of a trade can be worked out.

it is always cheaper to build new housing, and it is very expensive to renovate and upgrade the holder housing. you certify your other housing where you can. a couple other things, we talked about the two-way street. creating more south parking areas, on fourth and fifth, it makes a lot of sense. perhaps that can be broken up somehow as south park is where it is not just one large monolithic park, but you have at least a walking street in between and possibly some businesses in the middle of it because south park is one of the most charming streets in the city and it is a real pleasure to go there and go to restaurants. it is a really good formula.

sometimes the park is more welcoming if it is smaller and has more discrete parts to it than just a great big space. i thought was a really good start. i am sure the other commissioners have other comments. commissioner borden: i think there is always a balance when you're trying to figure out how to develop and grow a city that obviously these housing and other different uses. i was looking in the area around historical resources. perhaps we can prioritize or do zoning that allows in those sort of spaces to maintain the ability to do more interesting kind of his this is. what is always interesting is that planning is not a science, and i have a lot of friends that are entrepreneurs and people that call me all the