through in the transbay area. and so to give to the grocery stores, to get to the diamond restaurants, to get to the night clubs that are in western soma, most of my neighbors won't walk a half mile up what is left of the hill to get to a bus stop but they will hop in their cars and drive and add to congestion and the pedestrian safety issues and air quality problems and that is something else to highlight really is we have a really, the air quality in the south of the market is pretty bad compared to the rest of the city if you look at the department of public health dfrtion, they are sustainable sf.org information, and so i think, that planning is doing wonderful. but, i think that there is some catching up to do. but sfmta and also recreation and parks, although, south of market has about five percent of the population that

contribute about 16 percent of the property taxes because it is a new development. prop 13 and we may the market rate and not the property taxes, rec and park has taken the stance that they are not building any new parks and all of these people, whether they be office or residence, need open space and it should be something besides the traditional concrete plaza, but, very good work by planning, thank you. >> i'm back to my map, it is sue hester and the map that i have given all of you earlier is still applicable. and we have grown as a city, by filling the bay.

and my map and this map which is where the growth is, need to be talked about. the number... pardon me. i will go up. you are planning all of the... all of the development in the areas that are bay fill. a lot of the development, not all. and i have yet to have a workshop at this commission where you seriously dealt with bay field. this is not a staff matter. this is a commission and a public matter. there is a plan, acdc, for the sea level rise, it is happening everywhere in the bay. and other than san francisco, people didn't build dense

development on their water. alamada, marin, maybe a couple, but the areas. but. the bulk of their development is not on the water front. i look there, i don't see one person that lives anywhere near fill, i know where every one of you live. the planning department staff they may have some people that live on the fill, over near the fill and they are directly affected by it. but, i really don't know. i know that people died on the fill in (inaudible). the sexy press coverage was done of the marina because they were upper market class people,

south of market people died too, and there was no coverage. (inaudible) it was not even a footnote that there were deaths in the south of market. and they were on fill, you have (inaudible) a lot of designs on for expanded development. where is the discussion? i think that john ebelin was absolutely right in what he asked for, i am uping the anty, i want to have a real discussion on the policy of how the commission is going to deal with (inaudible) ross and bay fill and the development? >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> okay, seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini?

>> that was very interesting, including the comments from the public. i think in terms of what percentage of the new job growth would be office and not a lot depends on the definition, my interpretation is tech businesses cultural, education business, even some of the management phases of retail, would be considered office. somebody with basically is what we define as being in a space where they are mostly working at a desk as opposed to or a lap top as opposed to someone who was selling a piece of merchandise or working on a car. that is my interpretation of why the number is so high. >> commissioner antonini, you are correct, generally looking at the numbers and we would be happy to give you a memo that would explain the methodology, and by sector, about 104 of those, 104,000 of those are bisector office jobs but about 40 percent of the jobs are

in-office building and 27 percent of the retail jobs are jobs that happen in office jobs and 26 percent of the cultural institutional jobs are jobs that happen in the office buildings and that is where you get the high number you are correct >> i kind of figured that out because we are not just talking about law and accounting jobs, but we are talking about the vast, or the whole number of people who would be in the office as part of their work even though they are working for a cultural institution or a medical institution. so with that regard, i think that we, you know our projections should remain at the high end. because i think that we should or we probably will at least be at the regional average and the reason that i say that is some of the things that the director brought up about the attractiveness about being in an urban area not to mention the emp itus from legislation which is directing us to have

jobs near the transit in the population centers and the fact that auto traffic, travel is for your job is becoming very costly, and very unattractive to a lot of people and i can speak from experience having been in areas of the bay area during the week and trying to, you know, get from one place to another and it is not easy because of the amount of traffic on the roads if you are trying to drive. so a lot of the places that we talked about this of urban growth but a lot of the areas are far from any transit and morin, is inconvenient to get to, there is only cal train maybe a little bit with bart and santa clara and san jose has not as much transit but they are far away from the center of population, only about 2 million of the 6 million in the bay area live in the santa clara county, and

they seem to be having all of the growth in the eastern parts of the area which are inconvenient from a regional point of view because people are having most of the commuting there goes east to tracy or the central valley and the big commute is going east after the workday is over, i think that it is wise, i don't think that there is that much harm in the fact that these buildings will get built if they are built for office space. and actually, i read over his thing here he only said that heinz was approved, actually 171 second has been approved and that is one of the towers that would help to fund and i think that a couple of those are moving soon and 181 is getting closer to be a reality. i think that we can certainly look at this and, you know, and then see that ester brought up a good point about at least

considering the possibility of sea level rise and making sure that any new construction is anchored well into the bed rock or some way that you know it is seismically sound. because there are going to be earthquakes in the future and if we are on an area that is filled and doesn't have any strength of its own and the building should be anchored into something that is a lot firmer. and so i am sure that some of this is part of the approval process, or when the buildings are planned. that has been my assumption. but i think that it is a very good report and i think that it is important that we do actively pursue employers throughout the bay area to help them do what makes sense and that is to locate their businesss in san francisco where we have a great infrastructure present and we can built more easily close to transit. >> yes, i have to adjust two different things, one is the issue around the office and

most people know that i work for a global technology firm and 100 billion and we bet on cities because 80 percent of the population will live in the world's cities by 2030. just the facts that i can provide a lot of data and stats and lots of information. that is probably not of interest, because of the specific of the global problem in the areas around infrastructure related to cities and it is not a problem because the people did not anticipate this, so i am going to start with talking more specifically about the local aspect and then talk a little bit more globally, when it comes to the office the challenge that we have, and it is the same, it is similar to the last case that we just had. we don't own the land and we don't control when or where they build. it is entitle office projects that have not been built and long been built where we don't have any control over that and we have no way when someone tell us that we are going to build next month, what are

their findings and we will come through and whether their corporate headquarters will make a different decision or whatever. and so it creates a really interesting challenge because our supply and demand never are quite aligned. the good thing, i guess about prop m and all of that is that we actually save the commercial community from itself because they don't over built because we don't allow them to over build because of the process that we have, and it is interesting, that we talk to a ceo of one of the major commercial office builders and i asked this person about chicago and whether they owned it is true, when things are bad, they never sink and dip as bad as they do in other place and when the things are bad, they can't build the space big enough, the article in the

business times, non-profit into his oakland because there is not enough office space available at affordable rates and so, the problem is because we can't control these other choke holds in the system we can't say that we don't, we can't really just say let's not do anything, because the problem is that you can't control who is going to go forward and who is not. just practically, it does not work because we don't own the land or control the price or the financing and the other sort of factors and i think that that is always frustrating, i do believe in what i am seeing is that the trend, even in the technology community which has gone and everyone is making a lot of bru haha of the decision to bring everybody back to the office that is a return trend, the outward migration away from offices. i predict very and there is a lot of data out there to show that there is a trend back into the offices because of the people trying to feel more and

more disconnected because in the terms of the creativity and the innovation, everybody wants to work in the same space and they are to reignite the excitement and enthusiasm that they are seeing. we do have to realize that most people function in office space, whether or not they are considered a traditional office use like a law firm or etc., if you go to a scientific lab around the globe, where the people are doing the scientific studies where they created watson which beat jeopardy, it is still an office space, if you ask someone if they work from home, i work at home. it is an office. so, i think that you know, we don't really have the land to determine the other sort of things to call those spaces and we try to give overlays of creative services use, but at

the end of the day, the use of the office is a different kind of a business that occupies that space, so we do have to plan for the office knowing that functionally people work in the offices no matter what kind of business they happen to be in, in terms of the trend, i don't know if these numbers are exactly right, if they are off, if they could be more, but i'm happy to say that, you know, from our experience, and 170 countries in our work that we are doing around the city, which are basically betting our company on, there is a lot of data to support the need to better plan for populations that go into the cities, because the people are living longer and not only the young people that are moving into the cities and now you have the empty nesters moving into the cities, and you have people in the cities because that is where the opportunities and jobs are full stop. i think that we have to look both locally at what our projections and growth plans are in the bay area and also what is realistickly the global

trends of what is going to happen, whether we like it or not, we cannot stop people from moving from san francisco and we need to figure out an adequate way knowing that we are never going to anticipate the right number or the right size or the right time, that is what i would say to this, work and i'm happy to bring any sort of study, or institute for business value and a lot of studies on this topic area and we will hear and we can think it through a different hearing that it is that it is not in the sense that this trend is global. >> commissioner wu? >> thanks. >> i have a couple of different thoughts, hopefully i can string them together. so the first which is not our jurisdiction, are the jobs going to the people that are living in the city, maybe that is for another day. so i am going back to the report and the regional growth projections and thinking about

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