buildings. i think if we can set something up that is really about gradual change instead of thinking about rebuilding the market -- >> that raises a very interesting question about the economy, and there's an interesting question about the pace of change. and also, this is a challenge, given the economic conditions we work in. this is worth a discussion. >> historic buildings are not just important for the architecture, there are important because they are affordable. >> thank you. commissioner wolfern: yankee for the presentation. this was to the point in terms of looking at the network and

the whole fabric rather than just the individual buildings. one thing that i was struck with, when we looked at the rezoning of this area, recently, his understanding the potential of this district, and what are the things said give this great potential and what is not being realized? i really -- i was in as story with a similar block, subdivided by the alleyways. 20 years ago, if you were there, this is a little bit different. the alleyways were completely abandoned. this was a very an interesting place and this has been completely transformed as the alleyways have tremendous life now. one thing that were terry effectively is that they are connected, so that you can continue in the same alleyway

from block to block, and you have this seamless feeling. this is very vibrant and welcoming, and i think south of market has this, it is just unrealized, and one thing you -- we may want to look further at is how to connect them together more so there is -- they are more seamlessly integrated. right now, if you were to walk down the alley way, you are interrupted by the streets. these are confined to these big blocks, and with the one-way traffic, which is a disaster, i think all the streets should be two ways, suddenly, you don't want to continue because you cannot get across into the next valley. one thing that would be good to look at is how to create a

feeling of integrating the block together so that they're not completely individual and isolated units. the may be easier ways to get across the large streets. in some locations you can cross the blocks, but you have to go all the way back to the corner and would not be able to continue. i think the alleys, because of the scale and the industrial character of the existing buildings have this tremendous potential that is not realized, and it could make south of market a pedestrian-friendly area. the large, busy streets are not friendly to walk upon. this would show ways to promote the things that are there, inherently, that have potential. i think they started to modify those and i would encourage you to continue looking at that.

>> thank you. commissioner borden? >> i thought this was very thought provoking and i liked that word, fragmenting. it discuss an issue that we face on a regular basis, looking at the singular buildings or architectural statements, or a business with a particular focus. this is something that we often try to work on when we deal with individual projects but we don't have the full context or the ability to look at the context. this is important in soma and there is the opportunity to ruin what is the fabric there. or a chance for enhancement. the projects we have seen where we tried to break up the blocks,

adding open space and we talked about folsom st. -- and i like the idea of trees going down the middle of fulton, which is such a wide street. but there is a real need to look at how we create our design, in these neighborhoods. most of us agree that mission bay is not a shining example of a beautiful neighborhood had people want to move to. what makes this so special when we talk about older buildings being more affordable, they assume this much because of the fact that the neighborhoods with the thriving commercial corridors, that have the kind of businesses and the social engagement that you want are the older and more established neighborhoods. hayes valley -- this is a place to be, or the mission, because

they have the fabric of the smaller streets. there is the small kind of building with a critical mass of residents close by, who want to have things that are walkable. this is the challenge of market street, there is not a lot of real residence because we did not focus on that, so there are people on a daily basis getting their coffee or looking for a dry cleaner, creating that. you don't really get that until you have enough people buy enough areas, so how do you do that without completely changing the texture or the affordability, or the complexion of the neighborhood. this is something we don't have the easy answers to. in suburban communities, you have the town houses so you help

-- hope that you get the socio- economic diversity. but you hope that you can kind of create that and we are in a different position because we do not control what people choose to build. this makes it a little bit more challenging in terms of figuring out the kinds of housing or the projects people bring to us but we have an opportunity in terms of design and how we create these spaces. we ask for ground-floor retail, for the ground floor. what makes the space more cozy or attractive. in older buildings you see the ground first space, resonating with the space that you want to enter. you enter these kinds of spaces in the context of the building sometimes and it does not have

the same kind of vernacular, where this is pulling on you to walk into. we have a lot of brand new buildings with empty ground floors. and you wonder what it would take in the design of that, or in the building with the other concepts of the neighborhood that would make the space more attractive and more usable. i think the issue on recapturing the alleys is something that we have seen in areas of the city and this is an opportunity south of the market because there are some lovely alice, figuring out how to make those joint, open spaces as well, that people may have to go through for other purposes. i believe there is a great opportunity around trees and greening. i think that people love from

the streets. you walk down delores' street and this is so beautiful. there are so many trees and has this feeling that is very common. you go down folsom street and you want to get off as quick as possible. i think that, looking at the south of market, this is so critical for us to figure out how to make those spaces accommodate new places, but also, create the density that we need, taking into consideration a large residential projects. many of the spaces will continue to be other types of spaces and it brings in the concept of work and the types of buildings with people talking about, if you are an entrepreneur, you think of this space to work with. a lot of people want to be --

that is one thing san francisco has to offer -- many buildings that you cannot build today, that just don't have the same feeling -- anything, and you can replicate those things. i think this is a great conversation and i would love to overlay this with the western soma plan, as we look at the different design guidelines, how this resonates with how we are looking at the historic districts within that area, and that the zoning, as we think about this sort of thing in terms of the context of the corners. so, thank you. >> thank you. commissioner? >> i want to say, thank you very much. i want to say thank you very much for one very important

thing, the disintegration of the difference between what is historic and what is necessarily contemporary. the fact of the matter is that these are not mutually exclusive, and that the cities of all the overtime and that this is the fabric with which we work that, and we create the place where we have the individual structures and buildings that don't have much meaning in terms of the larger continuity of understanding the place, and understanding the quality and the character of a city. which does in fact represent a large spectrum of this. thank you for using the building where i live as an example. people -- if people have a hard

time understanding someone who may be interested in historic resources living in a contemporary building and wondering why the doilies are not on the back of the chairs, the notion around working within this area -- this is something i find very fascinating from someone who walks, in that area and lives in that area. the notion that you brought up about the orientation of the streets being markers and identifiers for the way we may look at how we attribute character to those buildings to help reinforce that is very important. the named streets are actually larger, they become the streets that may become the more dense locations, locations for greater

density and height. streets with numbers may contain, especially the sixth street corridor, sixth street, for instance, is a good case where there is a variety of building types on narrow lots, from market street, southbound, that represent a more residential character, as opposed to it a character that is much more commercial on the east or west street. i thank you for pointing this out. the notion about density and creating greater density, i would agree with martinez that -- i would rather see vertical height, then building spread

across the landscape, and seeing buildings in properties consumed in to the mega blocks. i think that this gives the opportunity, i think, at the ground level, with the orientation of pedestrian experiences, we don't and we haven't, seen many of these areas mature. valencia's street was an example because it has taken a long time for parts of the mission to get high. if you look at mission street, this was a movie theater have been for a long time. this fell into decline and it took a lie for that street to come back. it will eventually rise, but this is holding on to those things that make the character of that place worth coming back

to. i am afraid that looking at this massive development block, to create another way to get enough financial wherewithal, to see the projects successful so that this helps them decline in the long term. and then, the connection between that alleys and streets, i think that this in itself, helps for us to define a way in which the residents and the commercial users can coexist. we have set up this -- i think in many ways, we have set up a target that these are commercial locations rather than residential locations, and i feel that we have to come

closer to a model where they can coexist. so, thank you very much. commissioner moore: i want to thank you for a thoughtful way of stepping back. what we do here, and how we are asked to operate, is a great challenge to examine the conceptual issues -- and as an invitation to look a tthe central corridor planning, adding the overlay by which we test the assumptions that are done rapidly, for large real estate projects, for those

presented today, to step back to say how we can view the dna of the high quality analysis and translate that to how we adapt the focus on the third street corridor, to rise to the which speaks to urban qualities which are the d.n.a. city which i have not seen being expressed as much. i'm seeing there's a little bit of a challenge. i only saw a very small area carved out where it said this is where we're going to preserve small lots. we should be approaching every project that the d.n.a. is small grain lots and picking up on what commissioner chase just said, i think it's

understanding of how to interweave the mixed use nature of what is so strong about san francisco into any of those future assumptions. that doesn't mean that we cannot build larger buildings. but the mindless aggregation of lots, oversized property assemblies s. what starts to dull our ability to continue to really celebrate what's strong about the city. there's enough said about the alleys and enough said about the small dead end streets into which come the wonderful t intersections where you see the entire block as space, as living space, and all of those ideas can give us impetus to do the central corridor very, very differently than only driven by large scale real estate aspirations. and i see sometimes because in the way we -- the con isn'tual stepping back around some of

the principles which were presented today are not happening. we create first the big ideas and then we want to speak about alleys and pedestrian ways. i want to see that happen the other way around. i want to see a strong conceptual framework first. and then i would like to selectively fill in how we approach it. and that for me personally comes with a very, very timely analysis of what is historic architecture which we can recognize as historic architecture and what other noteworthy place-making buildings which we need to maintain and make part of the new setting. because i see more and more an attempt to -- and i'm not just talking about the rigor of historic preservation. but i'm really speaking about understanding the three dimensional d.n.a. of the city. which is also small scale. which is about ex-quissettely wonderful buildings of one of a kind and maintain that in

whatever form we can and have it harmonize with large and newer buildings. and then i think we have a very strong journey into the future. >> thank you. commissioner wolfram. commissioner wolfram: i just wanted to layer on one other thing which there's a certain irony i guess in saying that we need to retool soma because it's actually one of the most financially successful mabeds in the whole city. with right now the highest -- commercial rents of anywhere. so i think it would be interesting to add on to this analysis or to bring into this discussion a discussion with some of the people involved in the companies that are so successful there. and to understand what attracts them so much this area. is it the building stock, the large floor plates, the industrial character of the buildings? is it easy access to 2 a.d., it looks raw and funky, is there something that we as planners and architects aren't even thinking about that they find so compelling?

so i think they were there maybe originally because it was cheap. but it's no longer cheap. and they're still coming. so i think that would be another perspective to layer on to this. >> thank you. i really -- if i may, i really agree. i think there's an incredible richness and variety in soma already. and so maybe part of what the presentation is bringing forward is that maybe on the corners, there's an opportunity to add something to it. but not that it's taking away from what's already there. i love the variety of cultures in some jafment there's industrial. there's different classes. different races. there's an artist mentality if will you and the new twitters and the tech industry. so i just think there's a real -- it's a real eclectic neighborhood. and that's different than other neighborhoods in this city. so that, you know, maybe what can be brought to this and the central corridor of planning is some addition or layering on top of that. instead of a feeling that it's like a redoing of it.

commissioner hasz. commissioner hasz: thank you. actually, for 10 years, i had my offices at second and brannan and know the area very well and have several restaurants down there. and all the streets with them being so busy the thing that was so special about second and brannan is we had south park. you have an internal space to go escape the rapid pace of all those major blocks. you also have the waterfront. you can walk right down and cruise along the waterfront. it's fantastic. to me, the internal escape points create the walking district. because you have people walking there. i would walk to south park all the time. just have a coffee and mellow out. and like the alleyway that blocks them, fourth and fifth, right next to the tennis club. that would be another perfect spot to maybe create another south park which will be by the central corridor station. in speaking toward my fellow commissioner martinez's comments on doing this south of market and not as a big bang but as -- in pieces i would love to create another south

park feel. capture an entrance there with some curbs, create an internal green space and let that happen on its own. i think that that is -- you need -- you don't just need open space. you need escape, open spaces. places where people can get out of the chaos. and not hear the cars whizzing by. so that would be my suggestion to start with down there. thank you. >> commissioner sugaya. >> thank you for the presentation. i enjoyed it a lot. but i think if we come back to reality, you know, planning is politics. and planning is economics. and the aggregation of lots is an economic reality. because that's what developers want. and that's probably what's going to happen. i don't want it to happen but following on commissioner moore and martinez and other comments, i mean, the idea that we can somehow preserve individual lots is -- i don't know how a commission can do

that. maybe we can. but when you start -- you start telling people that they can't aggregate lots in order to create their development, it's going to be extremely ditch. i don't even know if we have that kind of political backing here in this city. and also we've been -- the presentation i know was geared toward architecture and urban design. but again the land uses there that interests me a lot. we had a presentation, commissioner moore mentioned the central corridor effort that's going on in the planning department. and i went back and looked through some of the backgroundwork that was done for the eastern neighborhoods plan which includes the soma area. and there was a land use map that was part of that that showed a great variety of land uses in the area. and i'm afraid what's going to

happen as somehow we assume that we're going to have to accommodate growth and increase the density, and i don't know where that notion comes from except from developers. and, you know, that we're going to lose all that. and it's going to be extremely difficult, i think, for us to be able to really make a huge difference in the way -- the future of soma is going to look. maybe that's too pessimistic. but i've been on this commission for six years. and i've been on the landmarks board, and i've been on the board of appeals. and i'm telling you, none of those bodies are able to control the kinds of things that i think need to be done. because it comes from a regulatory framework. and that's what we do. we're regulators. we have very few tools to offer incentives and to drive economics in the direction that a lot of us have been talking

about. and, you know, i appreciate commissioner martinez's comments. but again, we're not in control over the pace of the development that's going to be coming if it comes at all. you kind of want to hope there's another dote.com crash in some ways to -- dot.com crash in some ways to -- and everybody is enamored with this whole thing. and it has its good parts. i mean, there's a lot more development going on on market street. everyone, i think, is pretty much enamored that it's going to come back. but, you know, there's criticisms. i know they're popping up about the kinds of retail uses that are going to be there. and other things like the condominium developments that are not going to be affordable. and, you know, in some ways, market has its own life. we may not like it.

but there are a lot of people on market street. a lot of people. you know, i walk down market. some guy comes up and spits on my shoe and says hey, you need a shoe shine. what? you just did that, man. and there are a lot of people like that that are there. and, you know, they patronize their own things. it's not the kind of places i go to or other people. and so we label it and give it a label. but it has its own life. i don't know. eventually i suppose because of development, they'll also have to find another place to go. and it will be a neighborhood that commissioner martinez probably frequents more often. [laughter] because he likes bad neighborhoods. but i think -- just one last comment. one of the saviors of preservation is not having any economic development. because nobody comes in and buys buildings and tears them down. >> thank you.

commissioner martinez. commissioner martinez: yeah. i think one of the most interesting parts of the city right now is sort of south of dog patch and north of -- i think it's evans. there's just a lot of people, interesting businesses. because close to the caltran station. and has -- there's a lot of interesting businesses moving in there. so that's what i mean by the uses of bad neighborhoods. it's an area, not a lot of people are paying attention to in terms of -- there's some -- there's some improvements. but actually more driven by the dog patch people. but i think it's one of the more interesting areas right now. i think commissioner sugaya makes a good point. i mean, that sometimes as professionals we get carried

away. and the government is really limited in what it can do. we are really very limited. and maybe in certain -- in certain respects that's a good thing. sometimes. because it's really the public that creates variety. and one of the things that really is problematic is when -- is settling for mock variety instead of real variety. the whole thing where we make a big building, look like it's divide norwood 25-foot seg -- divided into 25-foot segments. it doesn't really create real variety. and i've been spending a lot of time in mission bay and along china basin. and when you go along chin scra basin, you've got the 25-foot segments and the townhouses and they did everything the way they're supposed to do. but there is no corner grocery store running by some eth