discretionary review is proposed for continuance to june 16, 2016, item 2 for case at sickle mandatory discretionary review is proposed until july 16th no other items proposed for continuance. >> any public comment on the two items proposed for continuance noirtd public comment is closed. >> move to continue items one and two to the dates specified. >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and commissioners, that places you under your

calendar, are considered to be routine and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 3 for case howard street conditional use authorization. >> any public comment on is consent calendar not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> move to approve second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to approve item 3 under content commissioner antonini commissioner hillis exposure commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and place us in commission matters item 4 consideration of draft

minutes for april 14, 2016, any public comment on minutes is closed. commissioner vice president richards move to approve. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to adapt the minutes for april 14th commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and place us on item 5 commissioners questions or comments and commissioner moore. >> just wanted to express my appreciation about the board of supervisors approving affordable housing development incentives by 234ish8 new percentages more affordable housing. >> commissioner antonini.

>> thank you 3 things briefly first of all, last sunday in the chronicled john king had a good article i'm not sure i agree with the criticisms of the buildings but one thing not pointed out from the façadism wouldn't be so unattractive in the building built new behind the facade was more contextual with the existing facade an idea we can't build anything that built like the period it came lots of examples we've built things that added to existing structures and they a lot very good some of them craft and some don't craft i think that is one of the big problems and second item commissioner vice president richards may have comments halfway reading the back making the mission it is wonderful in fact, i feel it is a book in

policy michael people should read a good history and the authors thesis the strong identity of the mission remains over the years despite structural and ethnic changes so, anyway he goes on i read about the period there 1906 to 1950 but referenced the period from 1906 to 1950 the power was numerous maybe people after the earthquake moved into that no hills in the way the streets curve the balance mission street and even ocean avenue begins in the outer part of mission particularly of note the promptal association a group that was powerful many of it call did predominant of san

francisco and they one chapter is intielthd neighborhood capitalism they were influential in promoting the mission in housing and business strong support from both labor and business and they did some amazing things many we'll be considering in the future parts of them, they were influential in getting the armory built in the mission district had to compete with russian hill and they went out the armory was more than for the soldiers and national guard to be stations it was a social thing they developed a harbor for the mission to have a shipping place they were influential in the creation of balboa park that is here used problem the house of refuge and influenced the rates

of these underwriters and able to bring insurance rates down and read to the purchase of spring valley water pretty much and the hunters point and the planning commission and many of guess mayors were mission boys most influential were ralph from 1912 to 1931 and supported by the democrats and republicans and others were patrick henry that have a short mayoral from 1910 to 1912 and james from 1896 to 19 hundred and timothy and robert first president of the uc berkley from the mission but most not able matthew sullivan an attorney the

head of the protective association and city supervisor the first president of the san francisco planning commission he was president of the called republican party and he was chief justice of the california supreme court a busy guy 0 might be a subject foreign a book i'd like to write in the future when i'll not doing dentistry it sounds like fascist anyway that is well worth reading the book and realizing how much influence in the midst during that time over san francisco and to that end as not in the chronicle we carl nolte an irish mission that is held this sunday 12 on a it is extremely popular and identifies the various part of the mission which were strong with the irish

community over the years so sounds like an interesting one i'll take it thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to department matters departments amazements. >> thank you joan's jonas and commissioners, i want to take the opportunity to thank the staff specifically administrative staff that worked behind closed doors at the department and many major agencies that seldom get recognize thank to all administrative staff to keep us honest a schedule it is crazy thank you for your time, and, secondly, the staff for the affordable housing legislation this is one of the more challenges of the piece of of legislation we worked on it was

changing every single day staff convict working intestinal with the supervisors offices and the city attorney's office specifically call out emery rogers and korea and kate connor spent a lot of time and i want to thank the city attorney's office for working with us partially on a complicated constantly changing piece of legislation it was figure out with political challenges so it was a challenging piece of legislation be obviously our work is not done but the adoption a milestone we'll move on to other affordable housing so thanks to all the staff thank you. >> item 7 commissioners review of past events of the board of supervisors no board of appeals report and no historic preservation commission hearing

yesterday. >> good afternoon aaron starr, manager, legislative affairs. at that land use committee hearing they heard the rooftop ordinance supported by the mayor the planning commission heard this on last year and voted unanimously to recommend approval at the request of the sponsor the item was tabled not going to the full board for adoption the next item an ordinance that will landmark a building at 9092 second street the hpc heard it last year and recommended approval the landmark designation it was for direct association with the 1906 san francisco earthquake because it is a unique survivor rest of the in was reduced to ashes this two-story brick this or building was mooirlg undamaged the only building to survive without fighting to save it is it

significant no 09 will small-scale building in downtown at 406 disaster and a structure one of the most prolific architects firms supervisor kim's made remarks about the landmark designation and commissioner peskin who signed on as co-sponsor any support the staffs report this item was forwarded to the full board of supervisors with a positive recommendation and commissioner peskin and kim's ordinance to amend the inclusion for 25 unions or more this trailing legislation for the charter amendment will be on the june a ballot you may recall this item was heard last week and substantially amended and needed to be continued one week the

planning commission considered that on march 31st and recommended approval with multiple amendments some were included in the final ordinance supervisor peskin made clerical amendments an amendment that will allow buildings up to one hundred and thirty feet in the 13i8d special use district and within the height district one hundred and thirty feet to use at grandfathering provision that benefits the building along van ness therapy unanimously accepted supervisor cowen offered two amendments that removed did carve outs by supervisor farrell last week the amendments were to one grater the developments at a 15.5 percent inclusionary rate and submitted environmental applications after january 2016 or before june 6th on the property of 10 acres the

inclusionary shall not apply with the properties executed agreements signed before june the housing units are not subject to the costa-hawkins removing the provisions were approved flaum and 4 people spoke during public comment two were in support and the other two had concerns the specific revisions for the lower rates for smaller projects and the language for the density bonus law supervisor wiener will not support it the percentages were not baselines feasibility study the new rates should be set with the feasibility study is finished he was skeptical that the feasibility study comes up there will be broad support low 25 percent in the study shows infeasible supervisor peskin

reiterated his strong support for the legislation and surprised that supervisor wiener was not supportive that has the same inclusion rates and for supervisor yee's revisions that provided the outline some more back and forth between the two supervisors the community voted 2 to one as a full committee report supervisor wiener voted against and kevin guy dofshg short-term rental talked about the short-term rental program as requested and supervisor wiener and supervisor peskin asked about the registration and seems to be preceding at a good pace supervisor peskin wanted a few minutes ago and the total of enforcement no public comment i sent you a copy of this presentation in an e-mail

at the full board the ordinance that aementsz the redevelopment for the transbay project zone one supported by the mayor and supervisor kim passed it second reading the bio annual housing balance was adopted and the inclusionary housing fee lastly the supervisors considered an inclusionary housing ordinance at the land use committee considered the previous day supervisor kim provided the introduction and the inclusionary housing rate going up and supervisor peskin supervisor yee and supervisor avalos spoke in support of the owners and supervisor tang gave conditional support for the issuance say 25 percent inclusionary housing inclusionary needs to be relooked at when the feasibility study but happy to support the owners and is supervisor wiener and supervisor farrell expressed option to the owners bus the feasibility study had not been

done and 25 percent was akin to putting the cart before the horse it passed the first reading on a 9 to two with supervisor farrell and supervisor wiener voting against and 3 introductions the ferns was a zoning map amendment for the terrace from rh1 to rh d and the zoning map amendments only feinstein regulations offered and supervisor peskin and finally supervisor campos supervisor peskin and supervisor mar introduced the administrative code short-term rental provisions the owners all the times a revise the short-term rental provisions to require the hosting platforms that a residential unit is on the registry prior to listing and required the platforms to provide civil administrative and

be criminal penalties for violation of the conversion ordinance that concludes my report. thank you. >> commissioner antonini. >> a couple of questions i was surprised midtown first was not rh but built in the 50 or 60s secondly, this addresses an second street that is the landmarked building survived the earth. >> 90 to 92 second street street. >> oh, 90 to 92 on the corner a cute this building. >> thanks. >> commissioner vice president richards a question for you mr. starr those short-term rental legislation was heard multiple times in the past and with the administrative code will it come back to us for any comments or advise. >> it can come back you want we can schedule it with 0 thirty

day timeline we'll have to work with the commission secretary to find the time. >> i absolutely would like to here that i don't know how the other commissioners feel. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'm not clear about process since the voters passed legislation that you know did not increase the policing of the short-term rentals why is this not have to go to the strollers for any changes to the policy for approval. >> the voters didn't pass it so it is not - the item failed. >> it never was a law it if didn't so like it never happened understood. >> if i may we should have a discussion with the commission officers to hear this two things of concern one that that is the

calendars are packed and you have a short time period and if i'm not mistaken the two specific issues addressed in the legislation were really discussed repeatedly at the commission during the other hearings we had on the short-term rental legislation so in talking about i think we should think about it it is useful to have a hearing on that piece of legislation. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to to general public comment not to exceed 15 minutes at this time, members of the public may address the commission to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. we did have one speaker card. >> georgia swedish.

>> hi last week, i talked about think exhibit with the project on diamond and it was dependability f there were two out of 28 i apologize there was 3 out of 28 were permitted demos if i may the overhead i'll show you why i was confused. >> over hits for the worker okay. >> on hoffman avenue i thought that oh, wait is it here shall i wait further are keep on talking. >> it's showing the pc. >> the overhead is not working. >> it doesn't matter oh, there

is this that's what i thought was demoed but not permitted this 465 not 441 that the original house here they were both pretty pricey 471 was the second highest in noah valley the outside was for the changed but inside was extensive and those of you who remember that was her are former executive director of the board of appeals director. >> here's her house when redone so that was my confusion looking at the google earth and there's the house to that was my confusion and i think that is kind of overall any confusion

those were smaller houses now really, really big houses goes to the question what is family housing and what we need for the city today, i was looking at any papers and this is a picture i took upon upper duncan that house the work being done i couldn't find original google earth but there's the original house like $2.02 years ago now to a permit and again, the question what is family housing and a real demo what's the number and i think this is important now the new legislation anything that is permitted after march first 2016 so i'm raising those questions

how everyone will calculate a demo and how should we look at the housing that comes after what's family housing what's family housing. >> public comment? >> general public comment not seeing any, general public comment is closed. commissioner christensen one quick question i know last december we talked with mr. starr and ms. emery rogers were working on looking at the existence of decisions i don't know where that is at i don't want to start a conversation but at some point we could. >> mohan is assigned to seeing how it can address this issue and also whether or not the demolition calculations are doing what they're intended to do to preserve affordability not leave that to you all and we

hope to have that initiated by september so - and great. >> at inspected another building inspection i'm egg hearing about serial permitting and all of a sudden the houses is gone i want to hear how that works thanks. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to regular calendar item 8 san francisco jobs 198 percent 5 through the pipeline informational presentation. >> i'll start off are a brief introduction today we are presenting to you, we think a series of presentations about the employment trends job office trends and kind of spatial issues with respect to employment and housing in san francisco it's been all of this in

preparation for the coming work in the next few weeks in the prop f and the understanding of the proposition it was thirty years since prop m was put in plays for the first time in 15 years you'll be looking at some prop m limitations, if you will, in the coming months we've taken some initial research into the job economic and spatial trends and josh will go on go over those but how we - the work we are doing and the employment trends relate to the regions and others peer cities as the commissioners said the three-legged stool is office and transportation and housing this is specifically looking at the job and today in the future

presentations we'll be looking at how it relates to the other 2 legs of the stool we've engaged the consultants that did some of the work they're at resources as well ; right? we're basically giving information not drawing conclusions but want to start a series of hearings on that with that, i'll introduce josh. >> so just the brief outline of the quick overview the hectic trends and focus on market trends in - whoops can you get the lower mike great. >> so we'll start with the macro and closer to the micro a lot of the this is no surprise

you've been in the area employment it's grown steady and the information in terms of job growth for the entire period and san francisco particularly has lagged behind the nation foyer several decades to until about the last ten years so the region grew steady over this period and in the last several years the region is growing double of the nations rate 20 percent and in 2012, the region spruced the job growth that was in - the region surged ahead san francisco grew slowly in the 80s and 90 and early

2000s slower than the country but since the 34id 2000s san francisco has picked up and out paced every geography the region, the state and nation in the past 10 years. >> and here's the numbers as you can see over the last 40 years the city grow 7 thousand a year the last 20 years is roughly about 75 hundred but the last has doubled the jobs in the last 5 years thirty thousand jobs so the question whether there has been a structural shift between san francisco and the rest of the region and the nation whether you know averaging over future economic circles with 10 or 13 thousand a year with the

long term of 37 thousand a year the most recently adopted plan the new - the first adopted one the region would grow by - 17 percent of that or one hundred and 90 thousand jobs that represented a historic number and what happened we got to see the region as san francisco has grown robustly and 20 percent of the regions jobs in the last 5 years and has produced over half of the thirty year in the first 5 years obviously those numbers need to be rethought and our regional partners are doing that in the current process they've adopted

new totals and upped that to 1. 3 million resisting the recent growth they've projected the region will glow more slowly in the next thirty years thank the nation be we're not flattened but slow down dramatically over the next 25 years what is san francisco's share we can have anywhere in between and everybody thinks will happen in san francisco relative to the rest of the region in the coming months that is active to see how we are growing only to gain prospective on our situation here's the 4 cities we've been focusing on so far and the

region boston and seattle and new york city we are interested in looking at other cities but found the dictated hard to come but we settled on those these cities are known for their con gumption and anecdotal people talk about them in the same conversation and share a lot of similar north american issues san francisco grow anymore slowly than all of them and again, the recent few years in which san francisco has out paced the cities those peer cities out paced the nation we're all in the same boat but we've out grown robustly so how it the economy changed as no

surprise the economy has transitioned to a white collar and some statistics to show you the federal reserve has put economic history in a sense in different buckets and making 2007 as the great transformation of the economy and great substantial growth but from 33 economy to less than 20 and particularly the manufacturing of the economy and similarly the service the professional economy dealt as a percentage of national economy san francisco has exactly mirrored the trends a little bit more so over the same in 1970

over thirty percent of our economy was an industrial segment manufacturing and warehousing and so forth and now under 10 of the nation our professional kind of economy doubled as a our city's commissioner wu if you look at the cities side by side the trends are the same because we're also kind of focused on office space it is important to note that note all the professional economy needs office space but 60 percent of san francisco jobs taking place took place in office statistics over 70 percent of currently noirl pipeline is for office space and it is a moment in time so our peer cities through the

same trends 31 they have substantial professional services and information and health care is a major component of the national economy those days just an interesting note that seattle and boston grow their industrial space and jobs until the mid 90s and joined the other cities what is common with the cities as well the relatively high wages in all the cities compared to the nation as what whole all the cities except for austin have wages well below national wages between 1990 and 2000 those cities kind of substantially started sdrans themselves as you can see substantial jumps in average wages compared to the rest of the country the cities have on

a different - what is shifting more regionally and this is actually something playing out one the really the refinery to the cities the not able shift in office market and particularly in the factors the shift from really kind of suburban to really more urban focus this is a graphic on the screen is one that was provided by a brokerage firm all the major office leases in san francisco over 12 years over the last 5 years completely dominated the office market in san francisco and really this is a local trend but also a national trend high tech has been here for decades and all

those in silicon valley will you suburban oriented and office park culture that was the case nationally that was substantially changed those firms are chas their workforces and transit saeblthd and particularly as the regions are transportation bottom line is it is important and those firms are likely to grow in cities rather than the suburbans and seattle and amazon is going out and making decisions to grow in city centers as opposed to did endurances it is not just firms homegrown in san francisco but also firms that still have their major headquarters in silicon valley and others are establishing beachheads in the city center not all of them want to commute

so as the man for san francisco increased after the.org we had our share the office growth as you can see with the actual office production was in a decline in 2009 it gradually picked up two percent and the san francisco office market has been more successful and resilient since 2000 after the.org bust the it was not reached with the rest of the region in terms of the office rents it was a tracked with the rest the region until a few years ago san francisco pulled away particularly focused on centers it is more pronounced the local trends you know the

story starts with the downtown prop m but the stories the downtown is filling up and interested in office space of private downtown in a broader range from the high-rise has grown and really all corners all neighborhoods are red hot that is particularly issues with the more price sensitive office users that are displaced and can't find any place to turn in the local market just to show you the office allocation by the first more than a decade 90 to 200290 percent was in c-3 the next 12 years it declined to 40 percent and our current office pipeline 10 percent in c-350 percent ♪ central soma and in other airs

like pier 70 and others port properties and outside of the downtown so this is not just the result of you know tech companies and other folks interested in non-downtown space but a result of the way of the land they're very few development sites left in c-3 they're going to housing through private plans like the market octavia we lagged off a chunk and dedicated c-3 to housing i'll be disappeared in the current pipeline we never get to more than 5 percent of office in the c-3 in the future we're looking at c-3 future unless something rapidly changes as i mentioned less and less business between the financial district and the rest of the city and really the cheaper neighborhoods have the rent

increases over the several years the cheapest is the market center and the most dramatic rent increases to the second middle of downtown the van ness has seen the greatest price increases in the last year so particularly the case of non-class spaces for the nonprofits and for more sensitive users the class c is the cheapest share over the last 4 years class space has doubled and it is office space in the city so what do you mean that means we're losing office users for nonprofits and numbers that show a sheer number of nonprofit in san francisco locally and relative to the state you know just an example of the sierra club national

headquarters in san francisco their moving to oakland next month their priced out so how did san francisco accommodate the rapid growth basically kicked off with huge vacancies in the great recession we had a little bit of office construction but very low vacant rates with the unemployment rates and goat dense indication where workers packed into the office space and just a note this is a national not new to san francisco or unique to the tech industry the great recession found people trying to squeeze into less space on the flip side in the hot market people are trying to

pack into a less space from an eir we assume we'll get one worker for every 200 and 75 feet of office space and anecdotal evidence shows the buildings and firms are space planning for density of less than 200 square feet per employee and you can find that in the paper almost everyday so you know we've been trying to make heads and tails and the data is hard to come by and antidotes if you run the workers numbers it is 275 so while firms are planning for the amount of density it is not clear across the market it has played out yet there is a question how many more workers can we pack into the office space there is capacity without building office space some numbers it is

speculative we think over a long period of time squeeze other 50 or 60 thousand workers in the space built over time will that happen a lot of factors that play certainly to incentivize spaces don't turnover that fast and folks have space to grow into 0 so we'll see what happens over time where did that leave us today accepting despite our robust growth we're bond for a slow down in san francisco and independent of what happens with the robustness of the regional knick economy one we're about to director or director mentioned the annual limit in terms of office rent we have a lot of vacant and dense if i did all

the low hanging fruit is picked off with the accommodate our of ohio this will take a few years to replace and at densification it will be a slow process over time to figure there is 7 million square feet of office space and the brokers tells you 6 and a half million square feet of office space but it is spoken for stuff will be delivered in the next few years so all this space will accommodate 20 to 25 workers over the next 3 years the construction is entitled 75 hundred off workers when you add

the other section we'll grow 10 thousand plus or minus over the years but barry a down turn in the economy we'll see the rents pressures really squeezed in terms of where we sit in the office pipeline there is a over one million square feet about over 4 hundred though square feet in the pipeline so it is small cap is relatively unused and getting used anymore released as folks take advantage but it is possible that in the long run we may never hit this regional in the future the large cap is a different story 1.6 million and about 3. 2

million we're tracking applications and other 3 point something million with preapplications wear reaching our limit and you know we'll probably in 2017 you'll be making decisions about what to do that concludes the overview and the director said we hope to come in the summer with a series of additional briefing one we're diving into the topics in more detail and love any feedback and like to talk about other things in the economy like jobs come back and talking about housing and transportation as a relates to the job trends as well that concludes my presentation. >> thank you very much. >> opening up for public comment (calling names). >> hi, thank you commissioners

my name is alice light the director of the community planning and todco john couldn't be here but want to make sure you reviewed our position on office space in san francisco right now that presentation was really optimistic and sunny and not what we're seeing in a march 28 piece in the business times we started to see the office space is cooling in san francisco that piece said there are over 2 million square feet of office space available for sub lease in the city now that is due to the sloan of the tech factor and in addition to that 1.6 million square feet of unleased office space in 3 of the transbay mega towers under construction and in addition to that between projects that are

currently under construction or entitle get to about a total of 6 million square feet of speculative office we urge you to slow down and wait to approve more office space until several really superior projects are before you next year with the central soma area and they offer community building affordable housing, they have excellent open space and also offer replacement pdr and office space those projects are in a neighborhood that the tech segment has already shown a preference and have the architecture in place for the tech sector prefers, however, if you do go ahead and and continue to allocate office space and

approve the ocean when they had mechanically can on 51 street todco is in a position first, as a condition of approval require the projects pay the $123 million at the outset instead of completion and though the condition of approval the project pay the annual $21 million transit fee now and yield the emergency bailout thank you. >> thank you any public comment on this item. >> i can remember when prop m was passed i was pregnant with my first child 29 next week prauchl was really a great thing

that was more than just the limitation on the office i think when the staff person talked about how the city was buffered by the downturn the fact there was prop m helped the city economic and i think people should remain that i'm glad they'll talk about the hours and hope when the staff looks at the housing but look at the issues i've been raising in noah valley because there is a direct link noah valley is ground zero for tech people to live in their pricey homes some i've shown you are occupied by well known tech people part time some homes don't look like they're occupied

with 5 by the time homes being used there's a link between this tech market whether it is here in the city with as many as offices in the city and down the peninsula and what has happened in noah valley i think that the other thing i hope is looked at with this housing point of this is the money the foreign money not just local money but is there money coming in those people are looking to have a nice safe place to put it that's okay. it is investment but what is the impact on the housing for people that live here those are questions that i hope are explored when the staff looks at the housing part of this in the fall thank you very much.

>> sue hester i was the attorney for prop m and the entire process leading up to there was a 7 year plan process that led to the adaptation of prop m prop m had as a time housing and transit online when the buildings opened we broken that link dramatically in the past decade we give excuses and we're not looking at the housing level that is produced regarding the workforce for the city it there has to be - you are planning there is difference from planning and automatic approval

planning needs to say what are the values what are we trying to do are we trying to provide housing for the workforce here or are reconvene signing them to enthat is all basically, we're doing the latter unless we seriously deal with the income lovely of the people in the city that work in the city in the mission, in the tenderloin and do some planning you're planning effectively to say leave the city we'll only provide housing for the availability of people that meet 200 percent of medium if i have an income serving the people in

the city residents of the city you're not going to be able to live here that's what is happening in the tenderloin and in the mission right now and in chinatown right now places that provide a large supply of housing for people who work here so one, it's not nice to get to things like this handed to i went online to get in report i didn't if you are always surprising people at giving heavy dense input at the hearing people can't give input i can't i going back go back to what is your rule are you a planning body is it the planning department a planning department or an approval department i think that is mostly the latter

i have to test central soma that is wiping out the planning for eastern soma and western soma and thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners tom executive director of littleable city think about transportation think of paying as. >> go the city is coast to coast on investments in the 1960s and 70 the bart system is over capacity that has not been invested in we've not seen a dollar of tsif people a municipal system look at the growth on van ness and market i

think you can't get on the train at market during peek traffic there is natural limitations to growths but you'll need to build and figure out a way to pay for that i think the idea of you know taking some of this value their creating in the downtown and users that to invest in public infrastructure is necessary is the ways to go i have twice begged your procures for money for bart in the - we're not concerned with regional we have tens of thousands of people including a huge number of people including

myself but an excuse not to spokesman money on bart you need to do that we're carrying a larger percent of load i was told your system is fundamental now you've going on got two fundamental systems congratulations but two systems that can't carry the load so you need to think strategical caltrain is part of solution i know the planning process is working but or even about the caltrain incline e line is a rapid transit you can think about the investment in the 22 streets station it is time to move it before double down that t on that focus on mission bay there's been focus to should the freeway be removed it should i think thinking about that line strategical what you need to do

in the transportation system if you look at the transportation it is later than the eastern shore caltrain it the natural recreation and parks department you need to make that and it will take money and resources it is a huge strategic opportunity you need to think about parking a lot of the - within the c-3 we'll generate more automobile. >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment in any order first director rahaim for taking the three-legged stool seriously and to recap that you know it was my suggestion that as an illustration if one of the legs becomes inbalanced shortening of the level of the

top part of stool is to the level it is uncomfort i appreciate the portions and think we have the housing adapt as well as the transit just want those data cliepdz will address the planning work that is what we're here trying to do so- yeah. i think it is interesting information you know take into account candle stick point, 5 m growth and mission rock office and mission bay we've got a lot coming online understanding not a crystal ball scenario but i am concerned maybe we've it's been. >> preview six or seven years of construction and maybe we're at a point of over supplying potentially so i want to - use this information to see what the

housing and transit piece to the gentleman says one of the stools that a cut short it is difficult we have a larger project coming out next week but will provide a potentially check in fees to help with the transit and housing and such there is a little bit of a balancing act thank you for that and looking forward to the next reports. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you stealing interesting report and an important one i did a little bit of math in the projection of 1. 3 million jobs in the 2040 is accurate and more reasons to believe that will continue that is regrettable that on the

industrial does the nation has lost most of manufacturing to over assess that's an issue a national issue we can't do much about locally but the other important thing about this is we do so a good trend where the suburban office parks auto eccentric are a reaction to the things that occurred in the 80s part of the cap market business commercial space in the city per year was one of the factors that threw companies out of the san francisco and began the urban sprawl not the only factor but one of them it is restored their realizing those things are more expensive most of their employees don't want to live there they want to be in urban

areas that's a trends we should encourage and when we talk about the 3 legs we have part of second leg housing is being built and most of the demands for this housing is coming from people some of which are working outside of san francisco by increasing the office space and getting tech companies and other companies to locate in san francisco where many felt workers are housed then it will balance things out a little bit i mean, we have to build more housing and all kinds of income levels but that should not come andxpense of building as much as we can to satisfy the huge demands by the workers that will live in san francisco and it would be nice their jobs were here, too this is a a good idea we have to look at this seriously where the trend conditions or not to the degree

we're seeing now we have to anticipate accommodating it if, in fact, the demand sustains if it didn't we can adjust it if nobody applies for the office space with prop m it sits there and can be used in the future if not there to be used we discourage the building of things in central soma and other parts of city i totally agree with mr. boskovich the transportation needs a lot of work we seem to kind of do things reactive for years some kind of rapid transit we have had many parts of san francisco a small city geographically rapid transit in its own right-of-way by bart or

muni or caltrain any of the 3 is fine but instituted it will take advanced planning i'm glad to hear that commissioner woo ho is looking at subways and someone will have to come up with a plan and have a bond issue that includes businesses to some degree wherever it can be done and foot the bill and get it done this is the only way to pool money from the federal a little bit of money here and there but i think there is an opportunity for good things to be done in san francisco i think that whether the demand remains as high as it is i think there is a good chance that will but can't say for sure. >> commissioner vice president

richards. >> several things finance i skechd when i see the area plan is adopted in her 2013 we clearly could see we were going to be wrong the company i worked at was providing for tony than 50 thousand jobs i don't get for 40 years 3 years into the 40 years we were grow and so far off and no surprises and second thing if we missed it by a wide margin why would we trust the numbers for the next 3 seven years doesn't make sense where did we go wrong and analyze it and say okay for the next thirtyiers make sure we don't make the same mistake could be right or wrong but i'll not bet my money it could be right

i think the - we'll see money at companies laying off and people moving to austin i don't understand that i think that i sat here and starting to think i apologize for not i was on vacation and i'm overwhelmed i think what happened as and look at it my opinion prop m was a success and failure it was a success is linked things from a point of view but, however, i think we're actually failed was there was no sunsetably of the office allocations what happened it accumulated and caused the jobs and which we didn't have enough

housing if i don't use my airline miles they go away the prop m we had too much own the office logos and used it it created issues we face today so you know, i want advocate if you want to use an older allocation first in and first out maybe is where he a overriding infrastructure and the list is ongoing if you want to want that pay higher impact fees so i think the office impact on the transportation was around $80 we were getting it for 20 itself e i know the board of supervisors want to 21 or 22 and went down in flames a natural growth we create our problems without

well-intentioned i think that we are going to have to do something we'll be in the same situation in 15 years so a person coming in the city for jobs a great high paying jobs if a person is evicted i have to go somewhere else and so that's a bad thing i think tying things together is a good idea and it is not like working in a private company we make a decision first, by monday we were veering off course and wednesday another decision those are big things not turn the intent task on a dime but reiterate i look at the adoption of 2013 we had to be veering off course we still went with the numbers we were off i think the

last thing to commissioner antonini's point i do wish we say had for manufacturing jobs in the u.s. i think some of the things we're seeing political those days with the presidential nomination on the red side come from agriculture anger there is not a lot of wage growth in the segments like in seattle and austin and san francisco i think even in that region we talk about the loss of pdr and i get that we plan for it there are physical things like getting my car repaired i still have to pick up something or ship something because we're online the world is not digital we still need to have a place for physical things someone is

touching something needs to be understood my thoughts very good work thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> i appreciate how you carry the conversation you'll be challenged by many the questions i'm asking not as challenging but to remind you what i like our analogy of the three-legged stool that includes the transportation that the transit and availability and contemplate for sufficient growth in i think the issue of land accountability i like to bring the abstract of sustainability into the

discussion those aspects ultimately was a lack of strength in the legs of your stealing stool and all has to balance otherwise you don't have a stool and nobody can sits on that. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much apologizes for being late i watched most of the presentation in the back just a few things definitely appreciate the report we have varies iterations of the information over the course of the last year it is good to see an update some of the comments will go to the next presentation with p d m i want to keep is tight a couple comments i understand todd could public comment on oversupply of space i

get that but what i've gathered in the information that we received here the commission and out in the world we have an oversupply of the kind of office space and not office space in demand that's why we're seeing a lot of conversion of pdr space that leads the discussion why we don't have enough space for price sensitive businesses typically a lot of them are nonprofits are producing things i think that is all connected i believe we're talked about oversupply of red herring so 51 street their design incorporates the building style and office style in demand i know that is something we're previewing what

we'll be looking at in terms of the transit i'll reiterate my - waiting on any day we appreciate that i understand we'll have a meeting we'll have an update on the rapid transit i want to come from their mouth and see what they're thinking as far as the planning department as a our city planners and commission we really agree with long term planning how the city operates in total not just in one piece and adapt real estate over here but in reality - where we are not in control of everything; right? we can't stop what we're

doing because other agencies are working on a timepiece but a sense of what they care but with the limited resources where they want to put those and have that conversation i reiterate that ask and then sort of continuing on with that discussion what we'll see you think there is a different three-legged stool that hopefully we'll talk about so we have transit and transportation and getting people from one place to the next is not only public transit but demand management we'll by looking at other things hike bike sharing and pedestrian improvements we'll put together marketing and walking to get from one place to the next without streetscapes that's another three-legged stool he wanted to talk about and putting that that way will decreasing

the public transit and the final piece market timing is a challenging piece for commissioner vice president richards that prop m works two well, we had a sewer place of office allocation i don't know we can do anything about that in terms of the future no matter what system people don't do things in a linear fashion and market timing is a challenging thing i'll argue that is in the governments role we r a long terms goal and - keep our eyes on the prices we think things are going to the future and right now population and density, walkable neighborhoods, liveable cities smart cities with you know a lot

of technology and different things that help the cities overflow room work together and not focus how can we control the infrastructure thanks. >> commissioner hillis. >> thank you for this i think it is helpful to take our minds sometimes out of the issues we face and see how they land in the context in the country and similar cities as well as the region and other cities are fooling similar issues we have you know i'm hoping in the next kind of iteration when we deeper dive their helpful here but what they're doing to address some of these and things like you know population changes or workforce

chances the percentage of their proposition and how they compare to us as well as how they're growing with office space in their housing human nature their producing that was interesting i don't know if you got any thoughts why this is the case if you look at kind of in the trends of other cities on wage changes and wages of the percentage of the u.s. wages kind of seattle is not growing level we are i remember there are wages percentages the u.s. wages between one hundred be a 80 and others are increasing at a garage percentage my thoughts why that is, i think their growing at a similar pace i think they're building more housing and popping it is interesting to see if this is the case i know that cities hike d.c. and

others are facing the same problems so i'd appreciate a deeper dive into that when we are longing looking at that and not necessarily a topic on the list the region you know how the rest of the region is accommodating the growth in population and workforce because again, we i mean prop m is absent prop m is out yatd not that much of an impact they were constrained office space we've spent a lot of time it is not that much of a factor if it is a time it is con training office space but assignment we're anticipating some reductions in the market you know again we'll play that factor 15 years ago and not much of a factor so i

don't know. i think we spent a lot of time too much time talking about it and hadn't been that much of a factor in kind of our growth or even con training growth some of the tops if we reduce the office allocations and not build it up when there's no office construction demand you know we'll be a a lot different situation where we constricting the office space i don't think so that is a great thing we've got this trend people are consulting have them sometime a lot of that didn't happen it if account for things happening so i like this but good to dig into the region as a whole and what they're doing and what we're doing to influence the rest of the region if we're taking on - we've historically

been a space where the region works but if not, we're becoming housed and not having you know that goes the other way what are the issues we face with the region and how we'll accommodate that will be an interesting topic so thank you for that. >> director rahaim. >> thanks commissions one thing that is helpful to understand how we can delve the details a couple of thoughts about the projections abag puts forwards you'll hear more about them as a thirty years projection and clearly why the jobs over the last 5 years is close i have and the trends line

- clearly the projections were off the first 5 years we didn't expect the high jobs i'll suggest not from the same factors of the same time period, and, secondly, how the prop m psa was allocate most of space not buy out was not allocated it actually just was in the pool and so f it was used as the market at the end of that; right? so i don't think we have to remember it is - the space was not you approved the space most of it was space that was not even requested for approval in the slow years that's why we have several million in the bank

before the current boom and the larger question is some building a different trend from the last half a century in times when the economy slows down there be likely be a higher demand for jobs in the parts of city that is a different scenario so i think that and - i don't know. i could a is a crystal clear but many building because of the interest in city jobs when the economy slows down that will slow down, if you will, in the city than in the outlying areas of the region we'll have to figure out over the coming years we might not see the dipping job productions nearly as in the region we have to think about that when we think about how we loot and plan for jobs not city.

>> commissioner vice president richards. >> number one was was not trying to - i don't think anyone of us could predict a perfect storm when i moved to san francisco it was banking and future 5 and bank of america moved to charlotte and several moved jobs to concord and sun valley the city was not much happening jobs were going away to your report director it is a different situation than ten or 15 or 20 years ago pr commissioner johnson points on the timing the timing i was referring to the whole point of

prop m interject but to time the infrastructure to the development not to market what we have with the unused space an huge amount of the development not to increase the extra even remotely matched in transportation and mr. boskovich said in housing we see every week prop m was intended to do one of the legs of the stool shorter it wasn't to create an unused allocation bullet how to use the office but housing and infrastructure didn't capture it was well intend but the stool if side what it was supposed to do. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to make an

interesting comment been prop m prop m regard the limbs was targeting the building size it was typical in the downtown plan a building like the bank of america which slightly was below a million, however, i think there is a need for a prop m plus which is reflective of the up zoning particularly the integration like transbay and rincon hill, etc. in that part of town now coupling in the central soma is a challenge we need to understand that was taking the simple limbs of whatever the square feet for years it was reflective of the building size at a time what was interesting to reflect on the idea you mentioned commissioner

johnson what type of spaces do we want because the only dishing out of square footage is not getting us where we want to go one of the challenges and questions to look at in the long run is the idea of redevelopment and repuncturing of the office buildings but some are coming to the end of their life cycle and any ended of life kitten i'm not talking about many of our historic buildings that have been restored in a different manner regarding building buses downtown buildings that are clearly moving towards the ended up of their lifespan particularly because they're not office buildings anymore there's one poeblt for redevelopment by using older buildings and increasing their height up to

contemporary building performance, i.e., like platinum but not looked at that as a spatial resource for how we accommodate growth and be office building and square footage inspectors did the office development typical in san francisco it happens in all cities of the world it is basically rob pertaining to pay paul you have new amenities on the market and your often moving people with favorable leases from older buildings into newer buildings with caveats for reduced rents and long term lease from 20 to thirty years that's the way it gets built up this is a gene for reality by which we need to look at growth

and to look at availability space quality of space and the idea of prop m plus simile the addition of new districts how we allow to developmental the over turn of what was serving the city well. >> commissioner hillis. >> just to comment on transportation which is important we're going to have a topic it is great too i think mr. boskovich is right we thought big and built bigger in the 60s and san jose that was a level of growth experience we need to do again we sometimes get bogged down talking about funding from new development if we look at the 60s and san jose the federal government was a big factor and other factors in how you replace

that will be a challenge everyone has experienced property owners where an old building arrest new building arrest old or new home if we think bigger on the types of transportation we need to think about the funding that is possibly available and look at it how the federalist funding has changed and what's possible. >> corey teague i want to talk about the timing of the impact fees not a comment how long it takes the infrastructure but clarify we used to have the impact fees by tsif not due to the certificate of preference but now our impact fees are due from the construction document we receive all our impact fees before the construction begins we did have a policy that was

adopted during recession that lithiasis loud you to deter in the construction has been phased out for several years i want to say we collect all the impact fees more affordable housing or jobs housing, transportation sustainability fees they're all paid for the issuance of the first construction document. >> okay. thank you commissioner antonini. >> yeah. some examples i think commissioner loo made a good point we have examples of repurposing older building the u e p the dental school is a home not only to the school. >> for tenants somewhere around figuring out and fulsome the t m g and macy's.org are there and micro

was remodeled and has a classic form but offices more usable and the other one that was done beautifully was pacific tell building was wonderful inside so that is going on and we'll encourage that a good thing to help us satisfy the demand for certain types of office space. >> okay. thank you i think that concludes that item we'll take one more item connected to the abag and take a break after that very good the planned update informational presentation. >> good afternoon gil kelly director the citywide planning i want to look this one item this is both of these fit nicely

within the overall work program your aspiration a new generation of planning with long-term planning i found your questions and objections really helpful for that what you've heard in the jobs on unemployment by the gentleman a few minutes let's not just look at job growth but. >> deeper dive into the unemployment including the lumpness of it and the characters characterization of new jobs with wages with other existing jobs with all kinds of ramifications the implications and so forth so as you recall this is akin with the housing 101 and one 02 not to prematurely draw policy

xuksz conclusions but we can do good planning so the comments if you and the public helped us had in generating additional information for that work so thank you for that i do want to say towards the new generation of home planning that has maybe 3 critical aspects one is we look at the nuances and dynamics two we make those connections we've talked about the three-legged stool and probably 5 or 6 legs of the stool we're not looking at a period of solicitation but ultimately we're trying to make connections and the third piece we're scoping to a regional lens that is in all conversations in

the work program one of the critical geographies we called it bridging the bay we're actually looking at city limits and engaging the cities around the bay area in this dialogue so we plan to come forward in the summer with the transportation briefing and will be launching actually beginning of the long-term transportation plan with our partner agencies both within the city and region we'll explore what is the 21st century mobility system what it looks like and we'll be coming forward in the june or july timeframe to talk about that on the redeeming notion it is great to have the abag representatives here to talk about the work they're doing in updating the planned area the

bay area was adopted in 2013, the rest were barely posted with 2010 or all in favor, signify by i it takes a while to get plans adopted and commissioner vice president richards talked about a spike in activity in san francisco maybe a high point in the circle an indicator so we've been working being abag and here's the first task so over the general structure they're using for the plan area update i'll say most of transportation thinking will feed in probably to the next area this one will be adopted late next year and late in 2021 so the choices with transportation will feed into the 2021 update and with

miriam's leadership the 3 big cities have been engaged in the discussions how we approach from a regional prospective the affordable housing crisis has become systemic so i think we're inirish with that, i want to introduce miriam and gil yum - and again, we're working to see how that lands in san francisco particularly given the conversations here today so miriam. >> good job commissioners

miriam chin planning and research dproshgs a pleasure to be here and thank you for making this conversation on plan bay area and thank you gil for the scheduling of this presentation by after the discussion of jobs and office space that is central to the strategy is attempting to do we think we have a somewhat successful plan b area of 2013, the first one at least one within the context we managed to get closer to the land use with the transportation investments but that established the basics it was a state requirement it was kind of pushes us to think harder about those connections we just heard quite a bit in downtown san francisco and you have already touched on

the central components the change in lifestyle is central to what is going on in the regional planning the regional strategies as folks have discussions are choosing access to restaurants and bars and access to theatres as opposed to access with a large house with a shopping mall those changes in choices and lifestyle choices have changing the region so in that context we have places that are experiencing those transformation and trying to figure out how to construct the inner scale but in san francisco obviously as we saw the change in downtown and the change throughout the city is quite substantial and your ways of understanding and sdusz the type of city and

downtown and neighborhoods you're pursuing essential and precisely on an economic level san francisco was the financial center bart was designed around san francisco to bring workers to san francisco and then a change in silicon valley and others centers and san francisco kept a pretty substantial economic base they didn't see the changes of the other cities but the resurgence and the economic growth and the transportation of the character of the city i think that is a new horizon so not just a service center that was a substantial service center but a new layer of not just technology but amenity and entertainment a big components of what san

francisco offering to the region and to the growth and that has come with all kinds of prelims for the city and beyond so i want to flag a couple of components what we're facing and what the tone of that update we've talked about how economic changes we go through circles and periods of economic growth we implement the 2013 it was still kind of on the recovery so the new dynamics are here with the employment growth so san francisco added more than one hundred thousand we compared that to housing san francisco has added substantial housing but it was a ratio of 10 to one it is at same situation at the regional level we added about half a mill jobs in 50 thousand

housing units so we true had vacancies we're using the housing stock but in terms of production but in terms of the way this displacement is occurring across multiple jurisdictions in the region and beyond the region and state those are fundamental challenges weeping we'll have to face here we are experiencing substantial changes in the composition of our population we have a higher senior share of 2/3rd's of our growth is going to be senior population and that comes with a different set of demands in terms of access to services and dive types of housing and increasing guest not only in san francisco but throughout the region a subsequent in latino and asian population and while that is a good asset

to the region it requires a different effort to recognize the histories and conditions of those communities and the third dimension we need to talk about the environmental challenges how the region is preparing for a seismic event for climatic change is guess coming and events like the drought we experienced has a substantial impact where we grow so as our aware it is subsequent and quickest not just about the number of jobs not just about the number of housing units but the place we want to create and how the place are changing and how we make sure their

assessable to the types of neighborhoods ambassador before i jump into the narratives one anymore component in terms of the economic challenges we're facing that relates to what you reviewed we're enjoying a very substantial employment economic growth in light bay area but one that is probation officer last year san francisco and on the places are absorbing substantial growth many jurisdictions are lagging behind with little have felt really that polartion overall the wages are dlooirng we're adrc more j.p. morgan jobs but taking that the wages have not there's we see the high paying wages which is a great asset that we also see a large increase in low wage the middle

wage jobs are shrinking and given the intelligence in the city that is a factor we need to paid attention how can we secure to the think stent possible expand some of the middle jobs whether teachers or nurses, whether firefighters there is a wide range of jobs that deserves attendance for the stability for the region so the fraction for you're probably familiar very simple priority where growth can take place close to transit and amenity and the priority an effort to retain the open space by to make sure that is open space within our communities

although at this point we have about one hundred 88 priority development areas and one hundred 65 priority conservatism areas they vary in terms of of the scale and size depending on the neighborhood or depending on the national assets we're trying to retain. >> in terms of the 4 san francisco - we have seen - you have seen that priority in terms of the a specific plan compared to many other local plans throughout the region as you probably imagine a mature transformer for the most part but for rising this plans to accommodate in the trends in the city i want to echo and thank san francisco planning department

staff and director for engaging in with with partners in oakland and san francisco and some of the other small cities we've had substantial conversations about transportation investment and economic development that informs the relationship across those jurisdictions and if we can extrapolate the analogy of the tools this can be an important reference 3 big cities that carry the transformation that have substantial conversations so in terms of the 4 caps there's a forecasts obviously a much more higher levels of growth 1. 3 million people and 1 - sorry 2.3 million people and plus jobs inclusionary housing in the last plan we were

expecting less than seven hundred thousand now more than 8 hundred thousand housing units this is probably the biggest challenge for the region that's where - accounts for the increased it relates to the increase in populion and jobs not necessarily some of the housing the additional housing we might need today a short comment on the purpose of the forecast the previously numbers were correct we tend to be wrong not long on population but an analysis how we've foofrdz the last 40 years we get close to the mark on population but the jobs are avenue off the circles are unpredictable we error on the higher side of employment that will be more on the lower see of jobs

but this forecast gets revised over 4 years with the information you provide it gave us a higher level of resolution on the ground this is the core of where we are right now the piece i wanted to discuss with you and where your discussions will downtown and the other neighborhoods kind of connect directly this point we have sketched 3 scenarios based on input from your sentences, your staff and elected officials bans input from stakeholders throughout the region and basically, you look at number one that is the mainstream scenario the intent to recognize potential growth across all cities in the region small or large are medium so a lot more suburban and growth in

the smaller cities with a different type of structure for services located in those small main streams look at scenario 3 that's the big city somewhere most of the growth in population, housing and employment goes into oakland and san francisco and san jose and again, the strategy to identify what is the level of growth if we were to max on the growth in the 3 big cities the level of infrastructure but also what kind of questions we're raised what kind of place will you be in under that 0 somewhere if that's possibly and somewhere 2 what is called connecting neighborhoods focuses on the 3 cities the 3 large cities in the corridor that connect them in

the east bay and west bay the intent for greatest connective active and broader access to jobs and functions across the jurisdictions so this will be shared in terms of numbers but it is an incident to the type of places that you see in san francisco how do you see the neighborhoods growing and how you see them growing what are the levels of infrastructure that will be required the level of services, how you see the relationship continue jobs and housing that's the type of increments we'll appreciate and just to flag in this update again, the 3 major concerns we didn't face in the last update the higher levels of these growth especially housing

given the limited public funding and the resilience component that is essential we'll be seeing those incidents within the framework of this time horizon and the third one the challenges of displacement and how we can bring more communities stability into the neighborhoods thank you very much thank you for your time and if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them. >> thank you for coming and sharing that information. >> open up for public comment if there is any first. >> thank you that was really good i learned a lot i don't understand the little drawing for san francisco p da and half the city with the hashtag and the rest of that

that is in my question i don't understand i'd like to understand so that's my question thank you. >> okay , sir. >> thank you commissioners sam executive director of liveable city this is a great presentation i think as. >> move on into the planned bay area we need to plan better and be ready in certain areas one is transit capacity which i talked about before i have a program laid out i take it not do it in my 3 minutes but second the development areas and others commercialism or conservatism it didn't make sense a political thing you really said let's do that based on criteria for example, the waterfront piers are a priority development area we know that the voters don't want to see a

lot of development on the piers but by sea level rise they all are serious seismic issues but west portal the 2 story building are west portal avenue is on good soil not threatened by the sea level rise so why development in hazard zones with in infrastructure and not development in areas there is infrastructure so think infrastructure efficient not going to be a lot of money for infrastructure how to use the existing infrastructure well, where can we grow provided at a low cost where transit should be moved in and there should be irish-american less development in other areas each of those p da should have a neighborhood plan and the neighborhood plan should be currency within the last 10

years and address transportation and street design and should address the street design and affordability in better ways than eastern neighborhoods and a strategic as neighborhood changes we should change without law so you your work program comes from the p da think about we're going to commit to planning in every neighborhood we've designated as a p da you have events with a downtown and better neighborhoods plan not a sub area it never got finished a long stretch the geary that was not finished or storefront so as you turn this into a work program and fold it in thank

you. >> changing to the regional context sue hester we have discrepancies when i was grouping in the 50s that was infrastructure money pumped in by the federal and state governments in housing development after world war ii in transportation development and the federal government and the state has daunted for faupz we have a regional action one -

san francisco can't always take the lead we adapted a transportation and housing fee and represent can't take down there is something that is to us regional apple and google and all those campuses are not providing housing and not providing transit because prop 13 had now development so far the city to have regional serving buzz businesses but not want to fund housing and transit that really needs to be brought out so if so it is a shame to the city that san jose and santa clara don't have a transit fee we should be yelling and screaming it should be across the board equity demands it it one of the things

we're not talking about we're assuming to organize serve high-end people with jobs and housing and there is a lot of supply of people and they're not going to live in the big mansions they're more for the cities so the other ting that is changing with time is flight capital is going into this area their funding a lot of high ended housing and in districts 6 particularly and they're also funding projects as they're doing things and we have major person funding and helping this capital from china in the city so there's no press who drives the conversation i don't know if

they've got it capacity but need to be a conversation that it had we need the fund to low income housing and transit thank he fu housing and transit thank tfund housing and transit thanofund t housing and transit than fund t housing and transit thank o low housing and transit thank low housing and transit thank you. >> on that that particular item we're concerned about the walk water and if you have gone to central valencia i recommending recommend central valley no water people think that because we have rain this year it is solved the water drought it hadn't we need 4 more years of el nino so take care of the water drought