extended street grid system, so there will be more transportation in and out, more ways to get in and out and more ways to bring people around the hill is a plus. in gener, i would like to say, this is really for the city rather than the project is that we must have more and better public mass transit all over the city and particularly potrero hill central waterfront. as far as the project goes, i'm very much in favor of it and i'm looking forward to seing it move ahead. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, my name is thomas shaw and i think it's commendable that you are attempting to modernize potrero hill. i wasn't served when the services came out when they carried out the scoping and i

actually own potrero hill -- so i support alternative 3. i don't want any changes to take place in potrero hill. the problem was in the zoning -- they zoned it for public housing and it's really private property. so i wanted to make a note today before i carry out any more proceedings that a mistake has been made. i don't want construction in the neighborhood, and i think that any changes that have to be made is my responsibility. so again, i want to support alterive 3, no changes to be made. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hi. i'm leable and live wisconsin street and i think my street

one is of the most impacted with the rebuild. i would like to say that i'm for rebuild and i'm in no way against the rebuild. however, i do have some serious concerns. on my street right now i can only have one person at a time visit me, because if they park across the street, they have about a 50/50 chance of their car being broken into. so this is going to be great that we'll have some eyes on the streets over there, but my concerns are several. i will try to be brief. i'm concerned about the high density and specifically about how that is going to affect wisconsin street. right now we have the majority of the bus traffic and that is supposed to continue and yet the buses -- there will be more of them. then they turn on 25th street, and they go down the hill. so we are the block that has the most bus traffic of anywhere. we're a very narrow street. i understand they are going to enlarge the street and make perpendicular parking, but i'm

still frightened if two buss are going up and one is coming down, this is happens all the time, there is gridlock on the street and we have to wait. i'm very concerned that they are going to cut down all the trees over there. there is going to be a lot of smog going on, and we don't have any mature trees. my primary concerns also have to do with the environmental impact report, the topics -- the three topics, the significant impacts that could not be fully mitigated this. is in the eir. noise, air quality and transportation. so i'm living across the street for ten years, where we can't mitigate noise, air quality and transportation? i work at my home. should i be moving? i am not sure how to address that. i would like the project to continue, but significant impacts that cannot be fully mitigate ready frightening and i'm concerned about the serpentine rock, which is a known abestos in it and i there there was a percentage of how

many asbestos, but i couldn't find it. but i would really like to know what that percentage is and it's critically important that be up front with the ten years' of as asbestos in the air and i'm concerned about the open space. on the map i have seen star king open space on the other side of star king school and showing it's right across the street from the new rebuild. won't that be great? yes, it will be great. it's a wonderful open space, but it can't be the majority open space of the project. there is only 2.5 acres of open space in the project. and star king is larger than that. they need funding to fix the sidewalks and they need the help for the space that people will go into. perhaps they can take that into consideration and help out with star king open space. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello, my name is richard lee and i live at 1099

mississippi street, very close to rebuild area. i would like to voice my support of the project. i think it will be an excellent use of the currently low density buildings to increase the dentity of that area. i think bringing additional people into the area will be a good thing. however, i do have some concerns about the extra traffic that this might entail. i would like to see increase in the amount of retail space that is being planned for the project, because i think if there are more services in the area, it will make it less likely that people feel the need to leave and that will help to reduce the amount of traffic in and out of rebuilt area. also, i would like to see more -- a new busline added into that area, because i think that with-- you know, with perhaps tripling the number of people there, i think we're going to need another busline to help service all of these people. that is all. thank you very much. >> thank you.

next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is dennismontalitio and my wife is bonny burgeon and we have been residents of 25th street for 30 years and we have seen a lot of changes coming to to the area. we are in support of the rebuild potrero idea. we just do have some concerns about the -- one the project density? going from the 600 to 1700; seems the infrastructure i'm a little concerned about that. the corridors to 280 on-ramp, cesar chavez, i would just like to see how that could be worked into this plan, where right now the corridor down to 280 is 25th street. and it's a very narrow street. we put a busline, the 48 comes

down there now and with two buses trying to pass on there, it can't happen. so i'm just wondering with this kind of density, how it will address the infrastructure of the surrounding area to make it flow? secondly, the mitigation, a 10-year project we're in the wind path of anything that goes on up there. the wind almost everyday blows from west to east. so i would like to see that addressed so that the people who live there, there is quite a few people who live south and east of this project, and i'm just a little concerned about that, ten years seems like a long time for a project to take place. thank you very much. >> thank you. is there additional public comment on this item?

>> i'm bonnie burgeon and i live at 1504 25th street and i have live there had -- live there had for 27 years. i have seen a lot of changes on the hill and i'm in total support of the project. i floored in it in the first couple of years and it's been wonderful to see the community building and feel the vibrancy of the area and watch people take ownership and watch crossover between potrero hill and so it's been really great to see all of that opening up. at the same time, my concerns are similar to a few other people who spoke who live directly in the area. the congestion and the traffic and i'm trying to wrap my head around it. when i come home down, i'm half a block way during high-traffic

areas i will sit in my car for ten minutes. there is no light there. it's just stop signs. and my concern is and what i would like to encourage there is so much building going on in dog patch and potrero hill, that i wonder how the communication is happening around the overview of traffic flow? because we're bringing in people in terms of density, we're increasing it [shr-eurbl/]. and substantially and i think that needs to be looked at and addressed and i hope that communication happens soon. i do support the project. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is jr epiler the president of the potrero business neighborhood association. i want to start off by saying that of course the condition of public housing on the south slope of potrero hill is catastrophically bad and needs to be redown and i'm here to

comment on the eir and i have a couple of concerns with the eir as its currently drafted. first, i feel like there should be an expansion of the effects analysis. i understand this is of course a moving target and a lot of projects take this sequentially, but when they are occurring at the same time, the effect is massive. right now we have actual data and pipeline formality eastern neighborhood plan and it's information that should be integrated into the analysis of the effects of this project. we also have additional plans nearby that are currently in process, or draft plan, some that like pier 70, coming online. same as the warrior's arena and how these play out will have a catastrophic effect on transit. also dealing with the transit issues there needs to be, i think, an [kwrao-gs/]aling use of the transit effectivivness plan and not a cursy look using

the transit analysis and going forward after the eir, with just simple design feature areas and back and forth among the neighbors. some of those from exiting park space probably can be dealt with in design. may not be eir-related, but should be pushed as part of the process going forward. we have one chance to get the eir right. we have one chance to get the planning process for this right. because of the size of this project, it is invitationly important, because of all the other things going on, it's vitally important to take, even if it's a little bit of additional time to get this part right, because this is what is going to make this project work for all of its residents. thank you. >> thank you. is there additional public comment on this item? seeing none, commissioners? commissioner moore?

>> no withstanding this is an outstanding project, i want to just jump into commenting on the eir. i think the eir is very good. it's well-structured. however, i have a couple of questions, which i believe need to be elevated and it's in the area of construction impacts. with funding for a project which has large public comments i think only focusing on construction impacts over a finite timeframe of ten years is potentially danger, because as you extend it over ten years it becomes almost a generational issue that people basically live in a continued construction site. this is exacerbated by extremely difficult grading conditions, which on their own require a large amount of cut and fill, and i'll not even

talking about air quality and noise, two areas where i think the city has a lot of experience with. but the constant need for a large area, the parameter of the site is huge and people feeling that it's never finished. can we get certainty about the public funding aspects as they affect construction impacts? is there certainty about how the project can reasonably phase? and what commitments can we bring to the front table in an eir to say this will happen in x, y, z? most construction projects of this seize take significantly longer than ten years. we all know that. there is bayview-hunters point. there is treasure island and on and on and on and all of them have public components and all of them have difficulties comparable to what is in front of us here. it's for that very reason, myself working on these things for the last nine years that i

ask you to be very conservative in how you -- how you set finite timeframes for construction and comment on them. it might be a larger issue to examine. and even if there is deferral to other things, i think the eir/eis needs to be very clear and precise for this type of an important project. >> thank you. commissioner antonini. >> thank you. i think the draft environmental impact report has a lot of things that are very well-done in my opinion. there was one place that i spotted. it's only a projection and it was probably done quite a while ago on page 4. 4-4 and it talks about the population of san francisco and it basically deals with census track 614 and it's not that

critical to the report itself, but to project the population of san francisco on this for 2015 is 816,400. and as we'll see in our commerce and industry report, the projected population of san francisco in 2014 or 2013 is already 636,000. so i mean, i know it doesn't mean we have to redo any of the report, but the projection for what it's worth is probably not accurate as far as reality is concerned right now. i can't comment on the accuracy of the census track in particular, just looking at the overall picture. the other thing that i think will need to be answered as comments and responses is there were a lot of comments about the density, which is very appropriate in my mind it's denser. but i think comparisons of the density in the areas

surrounding the project area with the projected project density. so that we have an idea of the differences in density. it's not -- potrero hill does have a variety of density and many parts of it already have much denser parts. so that would be good to answer. i think it's -- the report is good. i think we have to talk a little bit about the phasing of the plan. and a little bit more detail about how it's going to reach its goal as commissioner moore was talking about in the ten-year period of time. but i think from my understanding, the fact that it's been done together over a finite period of time makes it more efficient. because for this project to work, we need to have all of the parts of it. it's not going to work if there is just a part of it.

you need to get the financing, and it's going to provide economic and physical integration in a neighborhood that was segregated from the very beginning from the rest of san francisco. and the articulation of that neighborhood into the san francisco grid, which will be a big improvement. i did see one thing on view 5.3-13 and this is only an alternative. but it does show a very well articulated area, but then it shows an area that looks like it's almost the same height. i think this is probably -- this is a reduced development alternative. so i don't think that is representative of what the project would be looking like in the planned alternative. but i want to make sure that all the parts of the

development are well-articulated and are not just the same height all along in any part of the development. so that was one area that i wasn't quite sure what it's going to look like in the preferred alternative. of course, the inclusion of retail is very important, and the open space. those are a couple of other things. and finally, the transportation issue, which was raised by many speakers. i mean, i think some attention should be given to looking at trying to get some sort of extension from the 3rd street light rail that would service potrero hill would be a big benefit, and also improvement of the existing caltrain station; that would also cause an easy commute from there to downtown san francisco as far as other parts of the peninsula. so i think those are a couple of areas that might solve some of the problems that everyone has

talked about, about buses coming in, limited numbers of streets. if we had a light rail extension from 3rd street that came on to the hill would probably solve a lot of problems and people could walk to that rather than have to wait for the bus to come to them. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much. i also echo strong support for this project. public housing has always been a challenge in san francisco and the lack of federal funding has been there has been not enough funding for maintenance, let alone improvements. so this is a fan mofmove in the right direction. i just have a couple of questions. i echo some of the commissioner moore's comments about construction impacts and the length of time in which they are going to be considered. ten years is a wide enough berth that you have to think

there might be impacts that are going to linger after that, even after the last unit is built. but my comments are about the population housing section and also transit/transportation and circulation. so on the population and housing section. the eir has to consider changes to the population and housing, if the rebuild will require a provision of housing units in other parts of the city? so if you need to create other units somewhere else, you have to consider that a impact to the project for population. i question -- i question the determination that that is not the case for this project. unlike alice griffith, for this project, you need to

bulldoze buildings in phases and people need to move either somewhere else in the site or probably somewhere else in the city, if there is not enough empty units in other buildings. i question that given all the efforts that are being made around the city to build new units there is going to be room for the residents of complete sections of potrero hill and potrero annex and other parts of san francisco in the phases when their sections of the project are being demolished. so i would really like more description as to the relocation plan, and where those people are supposed to go? i know relocation plans are pretty complex and there is a lot of moving pieces to them, but we could at least talk about the projection of where these people are supposed to go? whether it's where in san francisco, or even potentially where outside of the city? so we can make sure that there is no physical impacts on in the

population change. the other thing for transit and transportation, i thought that the -- this is more about the project and less about the analysis of the project. but if the project needs to change, the analysis will have to change as well. certain streets are going to be realigned with the grid and gride decrease their steepness, while they are rebuilding parts of this project. i think that will change the equation for the amount of bicycle facilities that are needed -- going to be needed and wanted by the population. and i thought that the plan for bicycle facilities was woefully inadequate and therefore, the analysis of where they are supposed to go and the impacts of cycling on the transit and central circulation is also inadequate, because the project doesn't acrotfor enough. so i think that needs to be added in someone's alternative and i know a lot of people talked about transit issues and buses

getting up-and-down narrow streets. again, a lot of streets will be regrided and widened and there will be changes to the circulation patterns. so i think that is less of an issue. the only thing that i would say is that the transit impacts included the increase in transit from the phase eir for bayview-hunters point shipyard and candlestick point and i think that is pretty much as far as you can go in terms of projecting the future. can you theoretically talk about pier 70, but really you don't know until you see the first phases of the project what is actually going to be there and what people are going to need? but i would say that i would like to see a little bit more direct information about how the express lines that are going to be running down 3rd street from hunters bay

shipyard and candlestick? right now it only talks about the mini lines that go through the lines, potrero hills and potrero annex, but i think the hunters point shipyard and alleviating some of the demand on lines -- i think the fillmore 11 and 10 townsend that will be renamed something. so even if -- even if that has already been considered, i would like to see that mentioned in the eir explicitly. because i think that is -- [ inaudible ] thank you. >> well-don. >> are you okay? >> i also wanted to depress support for this project and happy we're at this movement in it and there was some public comment asking to look at new bus lines.

there is a lost analysis off and on existing and the tup, but i know there may be a process happening at the transportation authority and looking at transportation on potrero hill. but the more that any impacts can be looked at within this eir to make sure that we can get all of the improvements and additional transit on board as soon as he can align it with this project, think that would be very helpful. again the department is taking comments until january 7th. >> if there is nothing further we can move on to item no. 10, the commerce and industry inventory 2013, this is an informational presentation

>> good afternoon commissioners, my name is paul ikezoe with the department's commerce and industrial department. i will give you brief highlights from the 2013 commerce and industry inventory and then i'm available for any questions or comments. a little background, this is a report that we produce annually. this is the 20th edition. it feel like a bit of a throwback to talk about 2013, but we gather data from a variety of sources. and so in order to have the complete year of 2013, we have

to sort of wait for it to be released. so we have compiled information on employment trends, on office space, transportation. so the goals in the short-term to make this data available to the public, to the community members, to businesses and then notice in the long-term, we're establishing a consistent time series, so we can go back and look at long-term trends. so sort of biggest punch line is that our 2013 was sort of a record year for jobs. so we count over 612,000 jobs in san francisco. this is an all-time high as far as we know, higher than 2000, which was sort of the previous peak from the first tech boom.

the unemployment rate again this is 2013 is 5.7 [p*-rts/] in the city, that is down from almost 8% in 2012. and you can see that our unemployment rate is lower than the bay area's, lower than the state and the nation as a whole. this year we did a zoom into the technology sector and so you can see as 2013 count 37.600 jobs and over 2012 that is a 15% growth. so the graph there, you can sort of see since 2009 jobs have -- tech jobs have grown pretty significantly. we estimate that the average tech job rage is $154,000. so if you compare that to sort of the average office job, which

is about $19,000 $129 ,000 and average wage of $85,000. as far as waged, taxable retail sales, city revenues are all up over last year. or over 2012, sorry. and then as far as our building activity in the city, we have -- we saw about 27,000 building permits come in, again, that is a high from 2012. that is an 11% increase. and construction spending is at $5.3 billion.

so looking ahead to now, i guess, from the state we get unemployment numbers the latest figures are that unemployment is at 4.3% in the city and then some other data that we have is the tidf revenues, which are sort of can be used to gage the amount of development activity in the city are up to $12.6 million, a three-fold increase from the previous fiscal year. so the report, as well as the data tables within are available on our website sf-planning.org and with that, i am available for any questions or comments. thank you. >> thank you. we'll take public comment first. is there any public comment on this item? okay, se