Footage that you need. Open space, private deck. 81,000 square feet. Not too bad. You get more open space. Garage. 2032 square feet for parking. Sorry, guys. Way too much. Two Parking Spaces per unit. Dont support that. This commission does not has not supported, and im not speaking for the commission, but our track record on supporting excess parking has not been good. So, 870 square feet for parking, eight spaces versus i dont know whether it would be four ors three in a transitrich neighbourhood. Again, to demolish Historic Resource in my community over these numbers, it doesnt add up for me. Im sorry. When i look at the page s28, the partial preservation alternative, how it doesnt meet your objective four which is the open space in the backyard and number five, the profit. I would respectfully act that there is a Second Opinion on the soundness of the building and see the actual numbers on why it doesnt add up when you actually get more in return in the final in the partial preservation alternative. Im not saying dont do any project, but im not saying come in and bulldoze a significant cultural and Historic Resource in my community for profit. Commissioner moore . Id like to speak to the e. I. R. One thing that thank you for your testimony. This type of testimony normally does not enter into the description of an e. I. R. Although its extremely valuable because there are no metrics to really use the laws and regulations we have to really bring that forward and speak to its importance. My second point is what surprises me is that in an e. I. R. Like this one, were taking a side which is being rezoned from what is public use as a place of worship and gathering into residential and the only thing were suggesting is rhas it resembles a surrounding density. My question is that, in light of the fact that our objective for identifying the city, really called for completely different attitude, why are we not setting the metric file, for example, to an r. M. Where we can get more units with less parking and potentially accessory dwelling units. That is a little bit of the history of commissioner johnson in the past because all were doing is extending Current Trends continued and that is my objective for this e. I. R. , not enough. We have another project later today, which does the same thing. I do believe if we have opportunity sites, that we, by policy, need to address a different horizon than rh1 and developers expectation as the highest bar against which were measuring feasible alternatives. I leave that sitting in the room. It is a policy discussion and it is something that is sorely missing when we want to look forward because all were doing is building megamanages here, thats all were doing. Why were not approving the project, the e. S i. R. Uses the highest, densest building in rh1 to put together with the highest possible park and permitted under code in transitrich district. Those two objectives dont line up anymore, given what what we are up against. I just want to say that and hang sout a challenge to how we look at this e. R. R. And say that we may have to step back and add additional alternatives. Thank you. Someone from the group testified and i appreciate your comments. Are you in discussions you proposed some options for preservation and in mitigation measures fors the demolition. Are you in kind of productive discussion with the project sponsor . At this point . Youll have to come up to the mic. I apologize. So we can record this. No, we didnt know we could ask that so when we saw that, you know, report, we thought this would be an opportunity to ask those three. When weve spoken to him before, he let us go and do a test dig of it and hes always been perfectly kind and willing to talk to us. But that is we would like to do, if we can sit down and talk with them. You know . Again, we the building its been falling down forever. We just want that history. If there is some way to preserve that. Yeah. Because to me your requests sound extremely reasonable, given the history of the site and you should do that. Reach out to the project sponsor and start those discussions. Because just so you are aware, this is really just, you know, questions and comments on the draft d. I. R. Well come back with the full e. I. R. But it is supposed to give us the tools and information so when we do analyze the project in the future we have all of this information and recognize the importance of the site and what can still be done to preserve that. So, thank you very much for your comments. Thank you. Commissioner johnson . Thank you very much. I would like to thank commissioner richards and moore for their very cogent and impassioned comments on the project because theyre really helpful. I was im thinking in the same vein. But my approach was a little bit different. I really agree with commissioner moore that this is an opportunity to really rethink an opportunity site, particularly for thinking about demolishing and whether it is partial preservation or full demolishing and talking about representing the history of that site and other places. We really need to rethink what the future of that site will be. And i think extending suburbia, doing four Single Family homes with two parking spots each is the wrong direction to be moving in and im highly against it. Now that being said, the way that our process works with e. I. R. Is backwards because you dont propose rezonings when you are doing the project summary for an e. I. R. You have to propose what youre going to do and then you need the environmental impacts and then look at the project where maybe there might be decisions around rezonings or others. So, our process is backwards to be able to get a project different than what was presented here. I would propose that this project again, certain people not in the room, i always like it when i get the eyebrows raised when i say this this project really lends itself to a sort of quick, Small Development agreement. Or special use district. Because what you can do is make a deal for what would happen with the Historic Resources and materials in the building. You rezone the property to either rm1 or something elsewhere you could get more more density control and more units on the property. And fewer lower parking requirements. And you wrap that all together with doing something about the property itself. I think that is a direction that we need to go here. And what that means is that you would then also have the determination on the e. I. R. Wrapped into said Development Agreement or s. U. D. Decision as well. So i actually think that we should go back to the drawing board and how were going about this project. Because this site doesnt lend itself to our typical process of giving entitlements where you sort of look at the zoning, get a ceqa or environmental determination on what you can do based on the zoning and then you go and bring that project with more details for an entitlement. I think that that sort of step by step process doesnt work here and some sort of s. U. D. And Development Agreement would sort of lets not take years and years to do it. This is not a megaproject. But Something Like that to really play around with a lot of factors here would be what i would propose. Commissioner richards . I think one of the things and i completely support my fellow commissioners moore and johnson what we just looked at for this burnette avenue kind of sliver of a lot rezoning would be something that i would be interested in to parlay off of both commissioner moore and commissioner johnsons comments. What can we achieve here. Whats possible . So, you know, i see the square footage. You know, show me drill it down a little bit. If it is rm1 or we do do an s. U. S d. , what can we get . Can we get a little bit of backyard . More units . What do they look like . It is hard to come up with on the face of it, it is hard to come up with i like the or i like that. But what this is doing is making me ask more questions so were going about this backwards. Lets see whats possible and make sure that we analyze all those. This is an excellent document that the department put out and id love to see Something Like this for this project. Commission kerr moore . Commissioner moore . We should ask our e. I. R. S experts here. Were here to comment on the e. I. R. And in order for anything were discussing to enter into that discussion, we need to raise it as a question. And my question is, is it possible within the Congress Text of the existing e. I. R. To ask for additional alternatives, which are basically driven by policy that already exists among this commission, including the general board of supervisors. And that is looking at including the state. The state of california. Looking at the reasonable identification of any available, unbuilt lot in the city to look at higher density solutions. Do they come forward as a p. U. D. More likely than an s. U. D. But that should be the question we ask of the e. I. R. And id like to ask you to help us formulate such a challenge for the e. I. R. That is a really good question. Weve never were in the draft phase right now. There is opportunity to change the project description, but that is generally guided by the project sponsor. When the sponsor decides to change the project description, we can incorporate those changes in response to comment and ultimately come before you with the final e. I. R. Incorporating the changes. That is not to say were still going to come back with an e. I. R. We will still finalize the e. I. R. But we have in some cases added or changed project components and then disclosed them in the final e. I. R. But as far as policy for rezoning, that is the directors call. Yeah. Commissioners, if i may, i cant ring in. My monitor isnt working properly. The issues that youre raising really arent e. I. R. Issues. If i may, theyre really questions about the project proposal. And the question about zoning is one that there is any number of Zoning Districts that could be requested here. Just like any piece of land in the city, you could any Property Owner can request a change to the zoning. It was not done here partially because it is a little unusual for us to take a small piece of land in the middle of the block and say we should change the zoning. So if there is if the commission does have the desire for us to look at a denser Zoning District here, i think it would be incumbent upon us to sit down with the project sponsor, but also to get the feel of the neighbourhood. Because i would be a little surprised if there wasnt push back on that in the neighbourhood to increase the density. We have to have that discussion. It was not the project that was analyzed because that is not the project that was presented to us. If you are interested in us pursuing a change in the zoning on the site, i think that is more of a policy question that we have to explore with the developer and the neighbourhood. Commissioner johnson . Thank you very much. Not to prolong. So, totally agree with commissioner moore in terms of e. I. R. Typically within the e. I. R. , you are asking questions usually within the confines of what is analyzed under the e. I. R. And then they come out in their responses and i just think that this is it is incumbent upon us to really have a broader conversation that requires starting from the beginning and so i go back to my comments that this spros a little bit chicken and egg. And as a project sponsor would say, i want to do this. And heres my project description. They dont have an incentive. And i would say the power to just say i want the zoning on this lot to be x, y and z and that is what im going to do. They can request it. Right. But im saying with this particular project. I think that there are a lot of policy issues that are newer in the city. Im just saying that i wouldnt expect that a project sponsor for this project would say, hey, im just going to build rm1 and thats what i want to do. I think were in agreement. Im just pointing thaout our spros lail backwards sometimes. Sometimes we have to state what we want first and then make an agreement around that. Instead of putting pressure on the project sponsor to read our minds about what we want. And especially because the project sponsor know what we want before they show up. Thats all. And i would make the area right around here, getting to your point, director, about whether or not to increase the density on this lot would be challenging for the neighbourhood or the character around it. I would say that there is multifamily buildings around, like directly adjacent and right around the blocks where this lot is. So, i think thats kind of what drove my initial impression that why are we Building Four Single Family homes here when we have a school down the street, weve got multifamily buildings within a oneblock radius. So, why would we go backwards . Commissioner melgar . Thank you. Let me take a stab at verbalizing what i think were all feeling. You know, in response to your comment, i think that, you know, in terms of the question that were posing, the e. I. R. , you know, is looking at this as a Historic Resource and proposing several alternatives and mitigations to the loss of that Historic Resource. And i think what were saying is that what were getting in terms of the mitigations is not great. Its not sufficient. We are getting four 3600square foot houses with two Parking Spaces each, which is not consistent with what this commission has been supporting in a transitrich area that is close to a lot of services. And that is what were trading for this Historic Resource in breaking up this beautiful sidewalk that cannot be recreated. I mean, it can be recreated but not, you know, moved. [please stand by] [please stand by] theres a precedent for this in the neighborhood and we need to take a look at that. Absolutely and i support everything that every commissioner has said. If i had to put it in position of questions, how do we know objective number 5 was not met on the partial preservation alternative . How do we know the structural report is accurate, given where weve been with mr. Santos . I question that. Through the chair . We have a question, this is for the record, mr. Silverman. Normally we take questions and, in this case, and i understand the concern of the commission and generally agree with you. What its doing, though, is causing us to go back with the project sponsor and causing us to rethink from the beginning. Theres questioning about the e. I. R. And to recognize the history of the site. Thats one bucket that i heard questions and comments about, that should be appropriately responded to in the e. I. R. To me, its surprising, you know, that its rh1 oh, its 2. Okay. That makes a little more sense. You know, i think theres other questions about, can we get more density and maybe they can be incorporated into the buildings. That makes more sense. Commissioner richards . Vice president richards what is a reasonable rate of return . Were using terms here. Is it 20 to you . 6 to me . I have no idea. Its too general. There needs to be a yardstick. Commissioner moore i think those are all great questions, but they do not help us in response to whats in front of us. Were supposed to speak to Vice President richards but its in here. President hillis i think hes asking why its not a viable option. I think those are legitimate, standard e. I. R. Questions that need to be looked at. Commissioner moore one of the very difficult questions is that were going from public, Community Use to private development, private developer development, which doesnt have any relation in any form or shape to the users that use the church. And thats a question that i think you can ask the e. I. R. Why is there not housing built for the Lgbtq Community on the site that benefits those who have used the church . Thats a tough question to answer because the church sold the property, but in the city, for the city, and for the rest, its taking a lot and not giving much back and that could be a question we should ask. President hillis seeing no further comments on the e. I. R. , did you Vice President richards i wanted to point out so we dont go down a path that will never happen. The santos report was one of five reports and i asked the planning staff to make sure and highlight that in the e. I. R. They assured us that that was not possible. But i wanted to bring to your attention that there are five separate structural reports that all came to the same conclusion. President hillis it will be an answer to the comment Vice President richards i think president hillis lets get them answered in the e. I. R. If you have Additional Information that you want to provide to the staff, thats helpful, but probably thats the better forum for that, not here, now. Thank you. President hillis and, again, well hear the case in the future. Well have the draft, Draft Environmental Impact report back to us with answers to these questions and comments and questions and comments can still be submitted. If you gave verbal comments, you can supplement with written comments by 5 00 p. M. On january 23. So thank you. Very good. That places us on item 12. 201601557imp, 188 hooper street, 111 7th street, and ultimate properties with the college of arts. This is their institution usual master plan. Good afternoon. This is a California College of the arts master plan. Weve submitted to be on file with the Planning Department. This is the 2013 i. M. P. And that was accepted on april 22, 2016. The college is currently comprised of two campuses, one in oakland and the other in San Francisco. Cca is filing this revised i. M. P. Because theyre planning to consolidate the campuses. It will further the colleges mission to serve its students and engage the broader public. Headquarters is 1111 8th street. Cca also leases properties elsewhere in the city including 1321 mission street, Student Housing project, 38 harriet street, Student Housing, 350 kansas, and 75 arkansas street, another Student Housing project. The contents of the i. M. P. Include the nature of the institution, its history and growth. The physical changes in the neighborhood, and the employment characteristics, service population, physical characteristics, access, traffic and circulation patterns and Development Plan that includes avena 5year and 10year plan. The special use district is intended to facilitate the continued operation of the California College of the arts at 1111 8th street, which is characterized by instruction in the Industrial Arts and or fine arts while providing a regulatory scheme for an expansion of the campus of the future. Art and design was created to facilitate the continued expansion of cca. This sets forth a plan on which to guide set growth and expansion. To date, the department has not received public correspondence, but it has relating to the project scope in its entirety. No further Planning Commission action is required and the acceptance of i. M. P. Does not indicate approval. It acknowledges that the i. M. P. Has the required items and theres been a public hearing. In holding a public hearing, theyve fulfilled the requirements. This concludes staffs presentation. Im happy to answer any question questions. President hillis okay. Project sponsor, welcome. Good afternoon. Im david merkel, campus planning. Cca is fully accredited, nonprofit, independent college of arts and design, founded in the east bay in 1907 in the aftermath of the great earthquake and fire. We still do that stuff, the drawing classes. We offer a broad curriculum in the arts that attract students and faculty from around the world. When we established our San Francisco campus in the Showplace Square area three decades ago, the neighborhood was dominated by Light Industrial and many undeveloped parcels. Since then, cca has played an instrumental role in transforming the area into a thriving arts, design and Innovation District and were especially excited about sf maids presence next to us. Our updated master plan shows a plan to unify the plan in san fan and 2 3 of our operations are here. This would colocate all 1,950 students, 480 faculty and 260 staff in a single location. Its currently logistically challenging to maintain campuses on both sides of the bay and campus unification will make life easier for students and promote crosspollination across all programs. You will recall we worked closely with planning staff for housing for students. We house up to half of our student body. First of these is on the left of the slide, the panoramic. The said you saw last year and under correction right now at 75 arkansas and will open in the fall. And the final piece of oncampus housing will be presented to you momentarily. Our project goals are these three large ones. Its to make the new unified campus part of our curriculum by making it creatively hackable, so it can change with our curriculum. We expect it to be sustainably agile. Were a top 10 green building, but expect this one to produce more energy than it consumes. And then most importantly, we strive to continue to be a connective campus to our immediate surrounding in the greater bay area region. Our plan has two components. And theyre on coordinated but separate tracks that will happen over the next four to five years. Theres an academic facility expansion and renovation by studio gang thats in the early stages of design development. And theres an oncampus Housing Element thats further along in development, that will open a year earlier, fall, 2020. Well come back to you in next few months to review the housing and you will hear about both these Design Concepts next. Let me in tro he deuce first steve introduce first steve weisenthal. Thank you, david. I would like to begin with this image of the neighborhood in transition, with 8th street in the foreground, current cca academic building, former greyhound maintenance shed, elevated 280 and sites for the School Expansion and Student Housing, as david mentioned. Highlighted here are the current cca facilities within with a threeblock radius with sites for the project were presenting today indicated as 188 hooper for Student Housing, and you will soon see the New Academic Building that will allow cca to unify the campus. The principles are illustrated here from a campus perspective in connection with the neighborhood. The project and street scape improvements will be a big step in transforming from a collection of freestanding buildings to a true campus, connected to and accessible by the existing streets and green scapes as an economic catalyst in the evolving neighborhood. Zeroing in on the project site with the existing buildings in white and in blue the footprints of the Student Housing and New Academic Building that will span between hooper and erwin streets, framing a new courtyard. The project will add street trees, improve sidewalk crossings and maintain onstreet parking. The Design Concept that we called ecologizing the factory is about teaching, making, collaboration in the existing cca building by layering in new campus landscapes on two levels, hence the name, double ground. On the ground level of the New Academic Building is a 50,000squarefoot large, interdisciplinary space housing ceramic kilns, and campusscaled yard that spans hooper and erwin streets between the existing building and the new and within the new building, several open court yards enable art making and teaching to spill outside. On top of that, a pavilion with classrooms and space including a cafe and rooftop space for socializing and teaching, connecting by a pathway to the second floor of the existing building. In this crosssectional diagram, the connectivity between the levels of the double ground are intended to expose students to art and design activities and to connect them to, as david mentioned, a sustainably agile approach to energy and the environment. I will conclude my portion with these two shots. The first illustrating the transparency into the shops. And the second, artmaking activity in flexible, open shop space with visibility into the background. Good afternoon, commissioners. This project is for affordable Student Housing immediately adjacent to the main building. Our goal is to express cca as a campus by expanding the existing red, graded structure into an identifiable, architectural language. 8th street is a broad cca campus frontage of complimentary and related buildings. The construction of the building involves the demolition of three existing singlestory buildings and maintains the 24,000squarefoot building. The new building is five stories and 135,000 square feet with 520 beds for cca students in single, double and triple occupancy units. Primarily for freshmen with some upperlevel graduate students. There are structures forming two court yards connected above by two bridges the project includes an 8,500squarefoot cafe on the corner of 8th and hooper street. There are 164 bike Parking Spaces and no vehicular parking. There is also improvements to channel, 8th and hooper streets. A large sidewalk rationalizes the street grids at 8th and carolina, decreasing the asphalt and providing a triangular parklet with seating and landscape at the main entry to the building. Another is proposed on hooper in front of the cafe to expand sidewalk dining opportunities. 23 new street trees will be planted along the frontages. This is a typical floorplan showing the units along double h connected by bridges. The elevators and the two bridges are shared common spaces. The interconnected court yards provides 10,000 square feet of outdoor space including a courtyard shared with the graduate center. This is a view of 8th and hooper street showing the existing building architecture expanded to the new building as an identifiable campus language and the ground floor opening on to the corner. This is a view at the intersection of channel and 8th and the entry to the cca campus. And, lastly, the landscaped court of the housing wings of the shared common areas bridging above. That concludes our presentation. And were happy to answer any questions. Thank you. President hillis thank you. Is there any Public Comment on this item . Good afternoon, commissioners, president hillis. Im here to discuss the history of the relationship of the cca and the neighborhoods surrounding it. Cca has been a Good Neighborhood partner. This relationship is evidenced by the boosters past support of the development actions. Weve supported the Student Housing project currently under construction at 75 arkansas. Why does this relationship work so well . Well, cca actively engaging with the student. It takes on projects from the unique seating system at the park and working with working groups for a design project. Cca staff has partnered to develop a successfully implemented parking plan and participates in meetings surrounding the citys homeless problem. That were here today is another example of ccas cooperation with the community. Were used to Higher Institution that act outside of their plans and try to make up for it well after the fact. Cca is following the process correctly, taking steps in the right order. As a result, we look forward to continuing our work with cca. Were engaged on the design of Student Housing that you saw and we will be engaged in the discussions regarding the New Academic Building. And we look forward to working on those raised in the master plan and working on the provision of that equipped bicycle structure and reducing the congestion that may be caused on overreliance of traffic. Thank you very much. President hillis thank you. Sue hester. This is two weeks in a row that ive been here supporting an Academic Institution thats doing the right thing. I want to stress that and its important, really. People stepping up that are post secondary education institutions to be part of the community, even when they have a solution of creatively hackable. Thats the first time ive heard this as a goal. I dont object. I think that creatively hackable, addressing the project. We are a city that has had post secondary educational institutions since our beginning. And its a real issue right now how they get into the city. I like the fact that they address us in their i. M. P. How they fit in on planning rules. How they fit in by providing housing. How the circulation works with nonautomobile transit. People walking to their housing. People walking and using bikes. I think you should accept this i. M. P. Im sure you will have comments on it, but this is so immeasurably different in the context that weve been dealing with institutions in the city and when institutions do the right thing they should be applauded. Thank you. President hillis thank you. Any additional Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, well close Public Comment. Commissioner moore . Commissioner moore this is a first where were hearing an i. M. P. That is complete, accurate and exactly at the level that were hoping that other people would do, but also having the presentation of two remarkable buildings. I think this is a very first. Im extremely supportive. And im very appreciative of the productive relationship with the boosters who have been isolated and on their own and now growing together as a community as a whole, a perfect matching of talent, personality and i do want to, again, hold out that the table of contents speaks to exactly what were expecting from all constitutions, all, all. We had an example of similar complexity a few weeks ago with golden gate. Hastings led the way and here we are with cca. And im fully supportive of this effort. Commissioner koppel a couple of questions. I like what i see. I do know that the group has been a Good Neighbor in the neighborhood and would like to see them grow and consolidate the resources here to San Francisco. To echo some of the opposition and not to single this project out in any way, how do you see the parking situation kind of playing out, not just here, but we do know that the city is getting den getting densified and its a big city. How do you see the parking situation playing out with longstanding businesses already there . Well, first and foremost, were going to have 1,000 students not drive, taking transit. They will be colocated. So we think thats a big thing. Your question is timely because i came from an allstaff meeting today, where we announced our participation in the mission bay transit district, the launch of our go bikes and the carpool lane participation of scoops. We expect by colocating the students, its a livinglearning environment. And that helps right out of the gate. And secondly, we have a very high population of bike riders. Just in the building, we have 300 bike racks. So we do understand and its why we work closely with the boosters. We understand there are many pressures on the neighborhood. Weve been there 30 years, but theres a lot of other pressures and weve had a productive relationship with sfmta on phasing in different Parking Management ideas and well have to continue to do that because the neighborhood is in rapid growth and transition. Its exciting, but also challenging. The good news is, we are designers on those things and were happy to partner on those things. Commissioner koppel one other question. Looking at the floorplan and the units look pretty identical throughout. Will they be built up to San Francisco local Building Code . Absolutely. There is a range of units. Thats one of the more typical floor plans. On the upper levels, the units change to single occupancy. Theres quite a broad range of units and all of them have already been vetted with a preliminary plan check and are to code. Commissioner koppel thanks. President hillis thank you very much for the presentation and for the i. M. P. I echo the comments of my fellow commissioners. Its exciting to see. You meet the letter of the law in presenting us with this i. M. P. , but its exciting to see what you are doing there, the architecture, how its moving from what was a great reuse of an industrial building to a strong campus there and thank you for your participation in the growth of that neighborhood, both as a catalyst and helping us in the neighborhood kind of do good planning there. So im very appreciative and very supportive of your growth in this i. M. P. So thank you. I think this is informational, right . Do we need a motion to there is no motion, but by closing public hearing you are accepting their i. M. P. President hillis okay. So well do that. Thank you. Commissioners, that places us on items 13a and b for 004823enx and cua at 774 harrison street. Its a large conditional use operation. The item before you is a week quest for conditional use and large project pursuant to 329 to allow the new construction of an 8story, 85foottall hotel with groundfloor restaurant and 9 Group Housing units and grant exception for the requirements for rear yard. And street frontage, within the soma youth and family special family Zone District and the mixeduse office Zoning District. The project includes the dechl demolition of the Office Building and construction of the 8story mixeduse building. With 50 Tourist Hotel rooms and 9 Group Housing rooms, the proposed project includes an atgrade open space measuring 149 square feet. Two roof decks are provided. One for residential use. And a secondary for the nonresidential uses proposed on the property. The project would undertake street scape improvements. Replacement extension of the sidewalks and buildouts and highvisibility crosswalks. Per planning code sections 84249, requires conditional uses to establish a Tourist Hotel within the mixed use Zoning District, as well as to establish a refrt rant within the soma youth and family. Additional findings and market demand analysis for new Tourist Hotels are required and eating and drinking survey. The project sponsor has provided a market demand analysis provided by hvs and they also conducted their own eating and drinking survey, verified by Planning Department staff. Since it would construct more than 25,000 square feet within an eastern neighborhood mixed use, it requires the l. P. A. From the Planning Commission. That exhibit outstanding design and complimentary to the requirements. The project requests exemptions from rear yard and street frontage. The plan includes an eating establishment. The percentage of commercial frontage would be devoted to the restaurant. Limited restaurant uses would increase from 3. 7 to 10 , remaining below the prescriptive 25 . To date, Public Comments have been received inquiring about the projects. Since the publication packet was submitted, including of south of market committee, the after school program, local 22 hotel union and the Filipino American development foundation, as well as todd co, Alice Community gardens stewards. And all has been forwarded and i have printed copies for the Planning Commission as well. The project is on balance, consistent with the general plan and planning code requirements. The project produces a new mixeduse development with the restaurant and Outdoor Activity area and significant site updates that support the pedestrian environment and improve the public realm. It is consistent with and respects the neighborhood character and has the massing and scale. It adds a 50hotel room hotel to the citys stock. It will be a contribution to the tourist industry it. Adds nine Group Housing rooms. Will pay appropriate Development Impact fees. That concludes our presentation. President hillis thank you. Project sponsor, welcome. Thank you, good afternoon, commissioners. And congratulations, president hillis. On behalf of leon lee and taylor lee, and with us our architect, who has the pictures. They will be more interesting. But i would like to first thank our planner for her work and guidance through our application and review process. As she described, the project includes hotel, Group Housing and ground floor commercial uses. The property is a true opportunity site and the hotel works very well for this location close to the masconi center and its expansion downtown, south of market. Businesses and public transit, ideal for tourist and Business Travel reer travelers. The Group Housing will be longer term market rate rentals, which although market rate is inherently more affordable by design and targeted at young professionals. Our proposal is models after existing coliving and housing concepts. The commission may be aware of such as the common, which has locations in soma and oakland. Theyve made significant effort to work with the neighborhood and neighborhood groups and its been widely accepted including local 2, and alice Street Community gardens. They worked very closely with the philippinas and support the after school and work programs. Theyve from the beginning seen alice street gardens as an opportunity that will integrate well with the active uses that are brought to the neighborhood. The lees are helping with improvements at the gardens that will benefit them and the community at large. They view it as a partnership with the neighborhood. Way appreciate the opportunity to present this worthy project to the commission and your consideration. With that, i will turn to our architect and im available for any questions. Thank you. Thank you, tom. Its a mixeduse projects, primarily hotel. Coliving is 9 bedrooms on the third and second floor. Balance of the second floor is hotel, back of house and ground floor, Hotel Reception area and entrance, shared with the coliving and a small restaurant. From the outset, weve worked closely with the department and urban Design Advisory Team and studied the central soma plan and urban guidelines, some of which has been reflected in the design. One of the keys is architectural diversity. Since much of this area is going to change, theres not a lot of architectural context at the moment. So we have design precedents to our owner. This is a building in paris. Its clad with a simple metal screen is, but you can see through the screen to the outside. Its a metal rain screen and its perforated and its a calm form that we thought would be appropriate for this site. It functions as an exterior window shade that results in an energyefficient building, another objective of the central soma plan. The material weve chosen is a very simple, offtheshelf, corrugated metal. Its been used primarily for industrial structures. The difference here, it will be perforat perforated. It may look like a fragile, expensive building, but its actually i would not say ordinary, but not extravagant. Behind the screen is a very simple, conventional array of windows, one in every room. Each room will have a sliding glass door that will not be clad over by the screen and than will function as a modern interpretation of a french window, sometimes known as Juliette Balcony. With the screen in place, it looks like this. It will be a sheer plain with the Juliette Balcony poking through in an orderly fashion. We have proposed to use three times of perforated metal varying in defendantity. It will be more opaque as the sun is the strongest. Theres a notch in the middle of the form, to break up a long 160foot elevation. And theres a practical reason for it. Its opposite the Elevator Bank and its at an ankle because we have to get a kitchen duct around it and has to be set back from the Property Line at the roof. The whole building is topped by a simple metal cornice to separate the wall and rain screen. Another important objective is resection of neighborhood culture. Its a little hard to see from this slide, but this is the gateway to the filipino district, also leads to the alice Street Community gardens. We met with neighborhood groups, listened to them, and implemented a number of ideas in our design. With guidance from the street adviso advisory team, we have buildouts at the end of the streets, which has given us architectural opportunities. We created a small open space facing the community gardens. As the central soma plan predicts, the building has a small shadow impact on the gardens, small because were in the shadow of our neighbor at 750 harrison, and we only increase the shadow by 0. 29 , a little more than 1 4 of a percent. The owners mitigated this impact by working out an agreement that will include muchneeded improvements to the garden and details of this agreement are in the case report. We learned from dpw at the interagency meeting that theres a water line that will preclude planting of street trees. It will be landscapes with low vegetation, natural plants, as you can see throughout the streetscape. The hotel is on the street level. There is no checkin desk. In smaller hotels, they register you in the reception area with an ipad. There is also a lounge. So this area of the hotel will be more active than in a particular hotel, putting more eyes and light on the neighborhood at this end of the building. At the south end, the storefront is set back three feet from harrison street, a practical reason, so doors dont swing out over the Property Line. That resulted in a space that is a planter that receives the end of one exposed column. You might glean that we dont do too much thats arbitrary, so we have reasons for many of the design moves that weve made. And as ms. Jardines said, we received a number of letters of support, including from the Filipino Community and they will be working out details with the owner of the public plaque, which will most likely be cast into the sidewalk at the corner of harris on. President hillis lets open this item up for Public Comment. And i have one speaker guard, cindy gomez, but clearly there are others that would like to speak. Welcome. Im paul barera. Im with the filipino cultural district. Thank you for reviewing this item this afternoon. We would like to voice support for the Hotel Project at 744 harrison. It is located in the cultural district, just down the street from the filipino heritage center, home of the by bilingual program. Today
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.