Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    November 3, 2011 5:30pm-6:00pm PDT

5:30 pm
neighboring community neighbors -- [roll-call vote] so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously, 7-0. commissioners, if it is your pleasure, we can move to your 5:30 calendar. president olague: 10 minutes? let's take a 10-minute recess.
5:31 pm
5:32 pm
5:33 pm
5:34 pm
5:35 pm
5:36 pm
5:37 pm
5:38 pm
5:39 pm
5:40 pm
5:41 pm
5:42 pm
5:43 pm
5:44 pm
5:45 pm
5:46 pm
5:47 pm
>> i'd like to welcome everybody back for the san francisco planning committee meeting. we have not approached our 5:30 agenda item, central corridor plan and transit center district plan and transit tower. >> good evening, i am joined by steve, who will be helping me with the presentation this evening. if we could get the slide, that would be great. we were last here before you to talk about the central corridor planning project on at 14, six months ago. now it is in the initial stages of the idea gathering phase, and we're looking forward to catching up on everything we have been doing the last several
5:48 pm
months, our latest thinking, and the next tips and the project. just to remind you of the geography, are planned. is essentially two blocks on either side of the new on the construction central subway. this is what we call the study area. it ultimately, the recommendations may be pulled and slightly from these boundaries, but we're looking at this geography. and the last time we played this out, first, in terms of growth opportunity and looking at the city's long-term growth projections, and looking at logical places to concentrate growth in this area. it is already a business center, residential mixed use neighborhood, but this is arguably one of the most trances-rich parts of the city,
5:49 pm
and arguably more transit rich than the financial district, with muni metro and plans to connect them up the middle. a couple of other specific reasons. one, a significant portion of the eastern sonoma was pulled out of the easter neighborhood rezoning. it essentially allows nothing except for industrial uses. there is very little development activity, and essentially that decision was the precedent to watching this effort, looking at rezoning in the planned area, essentially from harrison south. also, the redevelopment plan was sunseted, and some of the parcels referred to various
5:50 pm
zoning that otherwise does not exist in the city anymore and we need to update the zoning. there are some remaining development parcels that we need to plan for. last, there is substantial development opportunity and the planned area. the area is still characterized by surface parking lots, 1-, two-story commercial buildings, generally largely underdeveloped south of harrison street. we kicked off this planning project in february. over the subsequent six months, through july, we went through a listening face. we met with groups. we wanted to hear what people had to save for their vision of the central corridor, the vision of the future, their ideas about growth and improvements. this conversation that we undertook was framed by the work
5:51 pm
that we had done leading up to it. last time we were here, we presented some findings related to growth, office development. again, some of the things i have highlighted. we published background report in may. that has been up and publicly available for some time, summarizing the ideas. we wanted to give people a significant number of strategies and opportunities for them to contribute and tell us what they think what we are in this early phase. first, stakeholder meetings. we tried to find every group that we could find that exists and has an interest in this area. everything from the western task force, the filipino american development foundation, a city- wide groups, the housing action coalition, and even the california entertainment association.
5:52 pm
we met with them on their turf to hear their ideas. we have a city technical advisory committee we have met with a couple times to advise us, including sitting agencies -- city agencies like mta, the mayor's office, bark, and regional partners, keeping them up to speed. we held two walking tours in june, in which we were not the primary speakers. we asked members of the community and various stakeholders to lead us on a tour of the area and tell us what they think about the future of the area. it was very well attended. we had everybody from the manager of the hotel to developers working on the housing projects, sharing their experiences and thoughts with
5:53 pm
other folks in the neighborhood. that was a very rewarding experience. we also set up a storefront, and for several days at the end of june, buwe occupied -- occupieds not the best word these days, but we set up shop in a ground- floor retail space in the central area, it donated to us, and the retail space, and we were there four days ou, partiay midweek, partially weakened, and we were there for people to look at maps, and just give us their ideas. a couple of specific ideas that we did that at this and several follow-ups with steckel groups. we did several language sessions, both well attended, and were helped set up by some of the neighborhood groups.
5:54 pm
we did mapping exercises, one focusing on the public realm and one focusing on all land use and the urban form. we created game pieces and asked people to use these game pieces or just right on the maps and tell us what they think about improvements to the open space as well as land use and building height and different parts of the planned area. we put the results of all of that wall data, unfiltered on the website. -- would put the result of all that raw data, unfiltered, the website. we also had approximately 100 replies on line. people give a lot of input. we have posted everything that we heard today up on the website. we have the results of the mapping games, the results of the survey, and we have compiled all of the comments into a
5:55 pm
multiple page bullet list. we tried not to filter comments, other than to compile a similar points into bullet points. there is not total consensus on every issue, but generally, the sense we got is people agreed we were heading in the right direction. this is an area that should have growth. almost no one that i recall said there should be an area reserved as light industrial. there are some different ideas about building heights, which is natural, but generally people supported the direction we were headed. we set aside all of this worked and created a public realm and existing conditions report, posted on the website last week. it includes all the things that we have heard, as well as summaries of all the various plans that exist, and some new analysis, including analysis of
5:56 pm
the existing sidewalk conditions to the recently adopted better streets plan and other good analyses. one thing, a major outcome of this public realm exercise, is to identify the key areas we are focusing our energy on for the planning effort. on the map before you, there are some highlighted yellow and orange areas. we cannot design for the entire plan area, we have to focus our efforts, and it is based on hot spots that people think are unpleasant, major pedestrian corridors, where we should focus our industries -- focus our energies. one is adjacent to the new subway stations, folsom, all the way to thompson street, the areas around the freeway ramps and the freeway overpasses.
5:57 pm
those continuously came up as unpleasant areas that need substantial attention. there is a large green triangle on the block by fourth, fifth. this block was repeatedly identified, even proceeding planning efforts, as they blocked that is a good opportunity to create a new public open space, due to large undeveloped lots as well as some significant public property on that block. we undertook a and intense design exercise exploring the uses of that bloc. lastly, it is a unique opportunity in this area, and we think we're going to explore that. in terms of moving forward with the public realm, our urban
5:58 pm
designers are focusing on these areas, and through january we will be developing concepts and holding public workshops. more immediately, we would like to talk to you about land use and urban form principles that we have gathered from this idea gathering phase and i will turn it over to steve. >> thanks, josh. i am steve, planning department staff. we have been compiling the ideas. i will talk about the land-use principles. we will use these as a framework of the central corridor plan. i will talk about each principal and give some of the supporting factors so that you understand the rationale. to start, slide, please? there are two over arching land-
5:59 pm
use objectives, support growth and complete compete -- come pleat communities. the first principle is to support substantial development and the transit rich area. the bay area is expecting a lot of growth in jobs and housing. to minimize greenhouse gas emissions, san francisco should take on some of this growth. the central corridor has some of the bay area's best transit. the next principle is to favor office development over other kinds of growth. the city as recently identified appropriate locations for substantial housing development and job development, and the downtown is the primary focus. quickly show it to slides. this is a look at the plans that we have done regarding where the housing should go.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on