Room. Actually, his closet. When they have a party, there wont be any privacy for those people. Its really a disturbance to them. The rooftop entry is blocking the light of the apartment, too. So its making it dark. And the light well, i complained battle about the light well. He blocked it off last time and now its equal to mine. So its the bathroom window for my apartment. So what he does is like making, you know, like theyre looking into our apartment bathroom windows. What kind of apartment do we have . You can think about it if you are in my shoes. What you object in a building to be built . Think about it. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Commissioners, i live a few doors down from this house. I oppose the demolition of this ape affordable house, similar to what i live in. The Commission Said three stories and equalsize units. This proposal plan is neither. At four stories in the back and 6,000 square feet with elevators, two separate outdoor spaces and only two Parking Spaces, it is being built by a speculator who has no intention of living there. Its not affordable. Im also opposed to the side windows. I would like to see a normal, twounit building that preserves the look of our street as it has been for over 100 years. Please dont destroy Affordable Housing. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Thank you, commissioners, for hearing this. As youve heard, there are 38 neighbors who oppose this project, as its been put forward again. It was four occupied floors before. Its four occupied floors again, plus the rooftop deck, terrace area. The units are not equal in size. Theyre 4 1 2 times the size the home thats there. Theres nothing in the neighborhood in character to maintain. And i ask that you have them revise it down. Were totally supportive of having two units there. It could be an adu, as one of you suggested the last time, but utilize the shared open space. Dont put it on the top, again, making it effectively five floors. Reduce the windows that loom over our kitchen and our deck in addition to those that face into the apartment next door. Thank you very much for considering our comments. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello, commissioners. Im ken yi. I live in the building next to this project. My issues with this project is privacy. With the rooftop deck, there will be social functions there, so there will be similar to having a party right outside your window. So i dont see theres any privacy in there, not mentioning in the light well, theres bathrooms, right at eye level when they stand on the roof deck. So theres no privacy whatsoever. And with the light wells so small, you can shake hands with the building next door. So noise, any kind of even smoking, so i think there will be disturbances when the light wells are so small that equal in size of the light wells. So i wish you can reconsider the design and eliminate the rooftop deck. Thank you for your attention. Thank you. I wasnt going to speak, but i cannot abide for penthouses on singlefamily homes. I think theyre inappropriate. I do want to remind the commission about 26th street, mr. Jensens apartment. You put a stairway to the yard. You took off the roof deck and put a stairway to the yard for the twoflat building, whiches with only three levels. So i think thats an interesting comparison. You can get to a shared yard and i think most people, especially children, would prefer access to a yard rather than a roof deck with a stair penthouse. Thank you. Thank you. Any additional Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, well close Public Comment. Commissioners . Commissioner moore . Commissioner moore the project is doing what we asked it to do. If its enough is a separate discussion. We asked for the project to take off the fourth floor. The way you describe the height of the building is from the front and its address side and not its appearance on topography ir respective of excavation. That being said, the project is three floors high. Regarding light wells, one of the basic requirements and one of the basic issues to look at for conformance of building with ajoining buildings is to match light wells. That means that light wells of equal occasion, preferably equal size, to protect other peoples access to light and air. The way that windows are located is, its not a direct view across, but windows in the new building are arranged to the side, so you will never look across. And i assume theres enough need for privacy on both ends that bathroom windows mostly have frosted glass or something that you never look straight through into somebody elses bathroom. There seems to be very little benefit in doing so. That said, generally speaking, the way the roof deck is arranged in this case is a modest, properly signed roof deck, given how we look at adding roof decks. It does not try to sit on the Property Line. It does not try to occupy 80 of the roof area. It is reasonably sized. 185 square feet. It is elongated in shape and proportion, so that i personally do not see any possibility to have lack of privacy with people looking from the deck. I just want to point that out. The sizes are not meant to be equal. And thats a comment. Doesnt mean that one unit 2,200 square feet that the other has to be within 5 square feet the same size. What we want to avoid is that one unit is 2,200 and the other is barely 790. Thats the intent of such a comment by this commission. I want to run out the observations and the suggestions by which we continued it. I see most of those conditions met at least by the cheer interpretation what continued. I would like to hear what other commissioners have it say, but those are my observations. I was in general agreement. I was okay with the project before with some modifications. The height is 40 feet. Looking to densify the city, so adding two flatsize units is appropriate here. Im supportive of it as modified. Commissioner johnson . Commissioner johnson thank you. Same here i see we made changes and they happened. Densifying. Im if the sure that more nipping and tucking really would alleviate the concerns we heard today. I think we tried to address them with the changes we asked for today. Motion to approve. Second. Thank you, commissioners. Theres a motion that has been seconded to approve with conditions. Commissioner johnson aye. Commissioner moore aye. Commissioner koppel aye. Commissioner melger aye. So moved. That passes 60, unanimously. That is 19a and b. 2465 van ness avenue. You will consider request for conditional use. Mary woods of department staff. The applicant is seeking a conditional use, parking ratio of. 75 cars, and street frontage greater than 50 feet in the rc district. The project is to demolish the vacant gas station and construct a 7story unit containing 41 units, 10 onebedroom, 2 24 twobedroom units and 7 threebedroom units. The project is in a 65a height and bulk district. Zoning district is rc3, which requires authorization for height over 50 feet. Street frontage over 50 feet. It requires variances related to rear yard and dwelling unit exposure. It proposes to meet the Inclusionary Housing Program by paying a fee or participate in the Mayors Office of housing and Community Development small sites program. [please stand by]cati. That will elegantly integrate into the neighborhood environment. It will add 41 units of housing with a good mix of one, two, and threebedroom units, with over 75 multibedroom units suitable for families. It will add residents to the neighborhoods to boost the local businesses and stimulate the economy. It will add over 25 2700 square feet of dramatic neighborhood serving retail space to a prominent city thoroughfare. It will provide. 75 Parking Spaces perunit, which is lower than the original 1 1 Parking Spaces perthe city. Since 5 of the units are sizeable two and three bedroom units, the. 75 parking ratio is important to the marketablity and the economic viability with the project. Our collective goal is to hire 75 union labor for the job. A High Percentage for a modest size project that doesnt enjoy large economies of scale. As Construction Costs have soarde citywide, we have balanced union labor on the job with making it economically viable. Upon entitlement, our plan is to Start Construction as soon as possible. In terms of Neighborhood Outreach, we have done Extensive Community engagement and almost three years of Neighborhood Outreach. The project now enjoys broad support from the community and the immediate neighborhood. We have strong endorsements and support from the golden gate neighborhood valley association, pacific residents association, the union street association, the 2415 vanness avenue homeowners association, and the russian hill neighbors association. In addition weve worked very closely with the homeowners at 2415 vanness, the adjacent building to our south to make design modifications to mitigate their concerns to their light and air, which they greatly appreciate it. We believe the marina neighborhood and the city can be very proud of this project. The benefits it will bring to the marina, and the elegant and striking statement it will make along the vanness and union street corridors, and thank you very much for your consideration today of our project. Well be available to answer your questions afterwards. Im now pleased to introduce or architect, glenn riscalvo of handel, who will present the buildings design. As mark pointed out, this is a very exciting project because the land has been there for ten years, vacant, and were about to put an amazing project on that site. I want to kind of apologize and also, you have some Supplementary Material there. I think some of the ideas in that package will show you how we thought about the massing, working closely with the Planning Department and udat, as well as some unit layouts that demonstrate how the units are laid out as well as the size of the units. One of the things that i want to point out on this slide here is the site is along vanness range anywhere from 55 feet to 155 feet in scale. Were about right in the middle, at 65 feet. Were not only in the vanness corridor, were on union street. The primary value of the mass of the building as youll see, we have a beautiful street wall along vanness that addressed the corridor scale, and then, as the building starts to turn the corner, we breakdown in scale and address union street. Again, 65 foot height limit, 41 units. Again, talking about outreach, weve started back in june 2015 with outreach, so weve been working diligently over the past 2. 5 years on outreach. This is the existing site from an aerial. Whats interesting here is this site had four curb cuts, and it made up 45 of the linear foot yaj. Were down to one curb cut, and one of the main ideas is because theres a bus stop along union street, we decided to take that curb cut and put it to the furthest part west, allowing more buses to cue along in that bus zone. Obviously, we cannot put a curb cut on vanness, so this is the only possible choice. We dont want to put a curb cut as we know from a traffic standpoint, we dont want to put a curb cut too close to the corner or near a bus stop, so this makes the most sense. It also makes sense because there is this is an area theres a massing relief between the adjacent building a and our building. The ground floor is basically made up of the lobby, the entryway, and retail space on the corner of vanness and union street. The main entrance to the lobby is off of union street, the residential lobby, and then, we have three entry points for the retail one on union street and two on vanness, so potentially, that retail space could be brokendown into components or it could be one large retail space. Were using stacker storage parking as a way to minimize the amount of excavation on the site, as well. The building is made up of basically seven stories. One ground, and then six stories of residential up above. The other thing i want to point out is the the slope of the street on vanness is about 5. 3 or so, so its a pretty steep slope for retail. Here, you have a picture of the corner of vanness and union, and here, you have the proposed project. As you can see, weve continued that street wall along the vanness corridor. Weve brokendown the massing into components of precast and glass and metal, and as you turn the corner, the building starts to step down as it goes along union street. Weve worked closely with adad on the storefront to really emphasize the ground floor of the building. It has over a 14 foot height, so its a very tall retail space at the ground floor. With respect to the bulk, we are looking for that exemption. One of the criterias that we want to show you here is that weve could have built this building out from Property Line to Property Line, but we decided, working with the planners, to make a more elongated building, and the Square Footage we didnt build on in that circle, we actually extended it out to the massing. I think the other component that were looking for is a rear yard exemption. We decided to do a side yard, and its important here because a side yard actually gives relief to the building next door at 1525 union, which is a much smaller building. Weve also worked with planning to create an lshaped yard, which allows us to lineup our light well exactly with the light rail adjacent to on 2415, so were respecting the 2415 light well, and were trying to respect the 1525 smaller building along union street. Here are some diagrams that show you where we started. Planning asked us to move the massing closer to the corner and create an lshaped. Not doing an l shape was inappropriate because it would setup a party well against 1525 union street, which we dont feel is appropriate in that diagram. So we started to carve it out, and we finished up with this one, which is great, because it works not only with 1525 union, where its set back, but it also works with the adjacent building at 2415. So heres an existing shot. You can see that the two that the curb cut to the right is the one the relocated curb cut adjacent to to union street apologies. Adjacent to 1525 union street. And this is a diagram just showing you how we brokendown the massing on union street between the two. If you have any questions, im available thank you very much. All right. Im sure we will. Lets open it up to Public Comment. Ive got a bunch of speakers cards. Gia colossi, erin ehrlich, lisa zimmerman, bob denham, joe bell, margie liverhia, and if you want to lineup on the screen side of the room. Hi. I live at 2415, apartment 605. Im very supportive of this project and the parking. Too bad its not going to be one for one, but. 75 is great. Weve been looking at an eye sore for nine years, and im just very much in support of it. Thank you for your time. Next speaker here. Well go from the screen side. Next speaker in any order, its okay. Ill just jump the line. Aaron ehrlich. I am a part yes, sir with birding and wile. We are counsel for 1525 vanness half homeowners association. As you saw on some of the depictions earlier, youre situation is unique because we have a light well that could have been impacted substantially by this project. We represent homeowners across the state in land use issues and its somewhat rare that im speaking in support of a project, and i do really commend the project applicant here of its Community Outreach and specifically the design changes that it made during the design phase to accommodate our concerns. The original proposed Design Elements for this project would have substantially impeded light, views, and air for a large number of the units within our 41 unit building, and the revised plans do preserve as much light, air, and view as reasonably can be accommodated. We understand that that does require some discretionary approvals, and we do strongly support that. In addition to the commending the plans revisions, we also do support the ratio thats requested of. 75 Parking Spaces to unit. As the commission well knows, parking is extremely limited in this area, and we are very concerned with the limited parking and the impact that additional residential units will have upon that, so its very important for our membership as well to have as much offstreet parking as is possible. With that, we thank you for your consideration, again, thank the developer. Great. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening. Im katey chisolm with web core builders, and we are excited to be doing this project with dan building. We know them they insist on a high quality in both design and construction. As youve heard, they have invested years working with both the community and the Planning Department to create a project that is both aligned with the current zoning and mindful of the neighborhood concerns. Excuse me, miss chisolm. Are you working for the developer. Im working with would be core builders. All right. Are web core builders working for the developer . Were the g. C. Okay. Then your comments should have been included in the presentation of the project sponsor. Oh, i apologize. I was unaware. Thats all right. So we should hear from the next person, actually okay. Your comments are part of the project sponsors comments. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. Im li im liza zimmerman. I bought a unit on union street in 2015, and so when dm, we found out they wanted to build on the site, i was excited, but i was also concerned about noise, but theyve been really lovely. They took the time to meet with me individually about my concerns. They took the time to come and meet with my whole hoa association and explained everything. They negotiated with one of the tenants on the first floor to build 15 feet away from our building which would allow us more access to space and sun. Theyve been incredible kind. I think theyre going to raise Property Values in our neighborhood and make it safer. They already have a security guy on vanness, and im completely fine with them having. 75 parking for the building because i dont think vanness and that whole corridor should be any more than congested than it already is, you know . Any way, wo