Skip to main content

tv   Government Access Programming  SFGTV  January 23, 2018 7:00am-8:01am PST

7:00 am
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 wasn't 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.
7:01 am
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 here's my project description. they don't 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 i'm going to do. >> they can request it. >> right. but i'm saying with this particular project. i think that there are a lot of policy issues that are newer in the city.
7:02 am
i'm just saying that i wouldn't expect that a project sponsor for this project would say, hey, i'm just going to build rm-1 and that's what i want to do. i think we're in agreement. i'm 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. that's 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,
7:03 am
like directly adjacent and right around the blocks where this lot is. so, i think that's 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, we've got multifamily buildings within a one-block radius. so, why would we go backwards? >> commissioner melgar? >> thank you. let me take a stab at verbalizing what i think we're all feeling. you know, in response to your comment, i think that, you know, in terms of the question that we're 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 we're saying is that what we're getting in terms of the mitigations is not great. it's not sufficient.
7:04 am
we are getting four 3600-square foot houses with two parking spaces each, which is not consistent with what this commission has been supporting in a transit-rich area that is close to a lot of services. and that is what we're 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]
7:05 am
there's 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 we've been with mr. santos? i question that. through the chair? >> we have a question, -- >> this is for the record, mr. silverman.
7:06 am
>> normally we take questions and, in this case, and i understand the concern of the commission and generally agree with you. what it's doing, though, is causing us to go back with the project sponsor and causing us to rethink from the beginning. >> there's questioning about the e.i.r. and to recognize the history of the site. that's one bucket that i heard questions and comments about, that should be appropriately responded to in the e.i.r. to me, it's surprising, you know, that it's rh-1 -- oh, it's 2. okay. that makes a little more sense. you know, i think there's other questions about, can we get more density and maybe they can be incorporated into the buildings. that makes more sense.
7:07 am
commissioner richards? >> vice president richards: what is a reasonable rate of return? we're using terms here. is it 20% to you? 6% to me? i have no idea. it's 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 what's in front of us. we're supposed to speak to -- >> vice president richards: but it's in here. >> president hillis: i think he's asking why it's 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 we're going from public, community use to private development, private developer development, which doesn't have any relation in any form or shape to the users that use the
7:08 am
church. and that's 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? that's a tough question to answer because the church sold the property, but in the city, for the city, and for the rest, it's 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 don't go down a path that will never
7:09 am
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: let's get them answered in the e.i.r. if you have additional information that you want to provide to the staff, that's helpful, but probably that's the better forum for that, not here, now. >> thank you. >> president hillis: and, again, we'll hear the case in the future. we'll 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
7:10 am
comments by 5:00 p.m. on january 23. so thank you. >> very good. that places us on item 12. 2016-01557imp, 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. we've 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
7:11 am
comprised of two campuses, one in oakland and the other in san francisco. cca is filing this revised i.m.p. because they're planning to consolidate the campuses. it will further the college's 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
7:12 am
population, physical characteristics, access, traffic and circulation patterns and development plan that includes avena 5-year and 10-year 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
7:13 am
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 there's been a public hearing. in holding a public hearing, they've fulfilled the requirements. this concludes staff's presentation. i'm happy to answer any question questions. >> president hillis: okay. project sponsor, welcome. >> good afternoon. i'm 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.
7:14 am
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 we're 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 co-locate all 1,950 students, 480 faculty and 260 staff in a single location. its currently logistically challenging to maintain campuses
7:15 am
on both sides of the bay and campus unification will make life easier for students and promote cross-pollination 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 on-campus housing will be presented to you momentarily. our project goals are these three large ones. it's to make the new unified campus part of our curriculum by making it creatively hackable,
7:16 am
so it can change with our curriculum. we expect it to be sustainably agile. we're 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 they're on coordinated but separate tracks that will happen over the next four to five years. there's an academic facility expansion and renovation by studio gang that's in the early stages of design development. and there's an on-campus housing element that's further along in development, that will open a year earlier, fall, 2020. we'll 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
7:17 am
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 three-block radius with sites for the project we're 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
7:18 am
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 on-street parking. the design concept that we called ecologizing the factory is about teaching, making,
7:19 am
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 50,000-square-foot large, interdisciplinary space housing ceramic kilns, and campus-scaled 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 cross-sectional diagram, the connectivity between the
7:20 am
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, art-making 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
7:21 am
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 single-story buildings and maintains the 24,000-square-foot 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 upper-level graduate students. there are structures forming two court yards connected above by two bridges the project includes an 8,500-square-foot cafe on the corner of 8th and hooper street.
7:22 am
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
7:23 am
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
7:24 am
presentation. and we're happy to answer any questions. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. is there any public comment on this item? >> good afternoon, commissioners, president hillis. i'm 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. we've 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
7:25 am
groups for a design project. cca staff has partnered to develop a successfully implemented parking plan and participates in meetings surrounding the city's homeless problem. that we're here today is another example of cca's cooperation with the community. we're 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. we're 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
7:26 am
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 i've been here supporting an academic institution that's doing the right thing. i want to stress that and it's 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. that's the first time i've heard this as a goal. i don't object. i think that creatively
7:27 am
hackable, addressing the project. we are a city that has had post secondary educational institutions since our beginning. and it's 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. i'm sure you will have comments on it, but this is so immeasurably different in the
7:28 am
context that we've 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, we'll close public comment. commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: this is a first where we're hearing an i.m.p. that is complete, accurate and exactly at the level that we're hoping that other people would do, but also having the presentation of two remarkable buildings. i think this is a very first. i'm extremely supportive. and i'm 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
7:29 am
the table of contents speaks to exactly what we're expecting from all constitutions, all, a-l-l. 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 i'm 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 it's a big city.
7:30 am
how do you see the parking situation playing out with longstanding businesses already there? >> well, first and foremost, we're going to have 1,000 students not drive, taking transit. they will be co-located. so we think that's a big thing. your question is timely because i came from an all-staff 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 co-locating the students, it's a living-learning 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 it's why we work closely with the boosters. we understand there are many pressures on the neighborhood. we've been there 30 years, but there's a lot of other pressures and we've had a productive
7:31 am
relationship with sfmta on phasing in different parking management ideas and we'll have to continue to do that because the neighborhood is in rapid growth and transition. it's exciting, but also challenging. the good news is, we are designers on those things and we're 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.
7:32 am
that's one of the more typical floor plans. on the upper levels, the units change to single occupancy. there's 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. it's exciting to see. you meet the letter of the law in presenting us with this i.m.p., but it's exciting to see what you are doing there, the architecture, how it's 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 i'm 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
7:33 am
accepting their i.m.p. >> president hillis: okay. so we'll do that. thank you. >> commissioners, that places us on items 13a and b for 004823enx and cua at 774 harrison street. it's 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 8-story, 85-foot-tall hotel with ground-floor 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
7:34 am
family zone district and the mixed-use office zoning district. the project includes the dechl -- demolition of the office building and construction of the 8-story mixed-use building. with 50 tourist hotel rooms and 9 group housing rooms, the proposed project includes an at-grade 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 build-outs and
7:35 am
high-visibility 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
7:36 am
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
7:37 am
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 mixed-use 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 50-hotel room hotel to the city's stock.
7:38 am
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
7:39 am
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 co-living and housing concepts. the commission may be aware of such as the common, which has locations in soma and oakland.
7:40 am
they've made significant effort to work with the neighborhood and neighborhood groups and it's 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. they've 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 i'm available for any questions. thank you.
7:41 am
>> thank you, tom. it's a mixed-use projects, primarily hotel. co-living 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 co-living and a small restaurant. from the outset, we've 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, there's not a lot of architectural context at the moment. so we have design precedents to our owner. this is a building in paris.
7:42 am
it's clad with a simple metal screen is, but you can see through the screen to the outside. it's a metal rain screen and it's perforated and it's a calm form that we thought would be appropriate for this site. it functions as an exterior window shade that results in an energy-efficient building, another objective of the central soma plan. the material we've chosen is a very simple, off-the-shelf, corrugated metal. it's been used primarily for industrial structures. the difference here, it will be perforat perforated. it may look like a fragile, expensive building, but it's actually -- i would not say ordinary, but not extravagant. behind the screen is a very simple, conventional array of
7:43 am
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. there's a notch in the middle of the form, to break up a long 160-foot elevation. and there's a practical reason for it. it's opposite the elevator bank and it's at an ankle because we
7:44 am
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. it's 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 build-outs at the end of the streets, which has given us architectural opportunities. we created a small open space facing the community gardens.
7:45 am
as the central soma plan predicts, the building has a small shadow impact on the gardens, small because we're 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 much-needed improvements to the garden and details of this agreement are in the case report. we learned from dpw at the interagency meeting that there's 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
7:46 am
streetscape. the hotel is on the street level. there is no check-in desk. in smaller hotels, they register you in the reception area with an i-pad. 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 don't 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 don't do too much that's arbitrary, so we have reasons for many of the design moves that we've made. and as ms. jardines said, we received a number of letters of
7:47 am
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: let's 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. >> i'm paul barera. i'm 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
7:48 am
center, home of the by -- bilingual program. today the streets are named after filipino historical figures. the filipino community appreciates the lee family's willingness to work with our community on this program, especially aiding after school programs and jobs in the hotel facility. we would also like to thank you them with the neutral car check. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. our 18,000-square-foot community
7:49 am
gardens has been there for over 30 years and it's very popular public open space with about 300 gardening beds that are provided to local seniors at no charge. of course, we realize this building would cast some shadow. it costs about 200,000 shadow hours a year, not quite. we approached the developer and asked for mitigation of that impact. the gardens being 30 years old needs a complete rebuilding and we're -- it's about a $500,000 project overall. we're 2/3 of the way through it. and -- but we still have more to go. we have had -- there's a precedent set that before the city agreed to donate $1 on every hour of shadow to the
7:50 am
future improvements of the gardens. we prevailed upon them to do that and they agreed, and we think it's a reasonable approach to mitigating shadow on public and community spaces not covered by the sunshine ordinance at all, such as our garden. as it happens, this project's shadow, about half falls on our service area, not on the act of open space in our gardens. and so we asked for 50% of that amount and the developers agreed to participate -- $100,000. and we believe that is satisfactory mitigation. in general, a small hotel like this is neighborhood-scaled and we think they're a positive addition. the reason is, they bring 24-hour life to the neighborhood. there is 24-hour staff on the desk, at the street level.
7:51 am
that definitely improves the neighborhood's security and safety, especially on an alley such as this is. and that's really a welcome improvement. i can also tell you that hotel operators take much more interest in neighborhoods than office building operators. there are two office buildings on this block. i speak from experience. they care, because of course, they have to care for the sake of their clients and guests. that, as well, is a positive piece of neighborhood building. all in all, this is a welcome project. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. ms. gomez? >> good afternoon. cynthia gomez, research analyst and hotel workers union. this project is joining a pretty long and storied history of hotel developers that sign agreements that will allow hotel workers to unionize and, therefore, guarantee them the
7:52 am
opportunity the kind of affordable healthcare living wages that are essential. one of the distinguishing factors is that this sponsor came to us voluntarily to sign this agreement early on in the process. another distinguishing factor, as far as san francisco goes, it sets the record for the smallest project that has made this commitment. so it has set the bar for including all different sizes in these agreements. we're happy to be standing with our community partners, who are also supporting this project. so thank you. >> president hillis: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm bernadette sea, filipino american foundation. we run the after school program
7:53 am
at the filipino education center. it's a newcomers school. the project sponsor, it's been unique in the relationship with us, in that they came to us early on to listen about what we do, and to understand it, and incorporate that in their project allowing a plaque to be there and coming to several events to build relationship with us and that's key in becoming a community partner. they demonstrate that, not just when they need you for this hearing. so i thank you and support them. >> president hillis: thank you. any additional public comment on this item? seeing none, we'll close public comment commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: i think this is a wonderful project. i'm really excited about it. it's not just the architectural
7:54 am
configuration, how it fits. i like the story that mr mr. elberling as long-term steward of the area tells us about the park and open space. the one question i have is, do we have a hotel operator? >> we don't have an operator. we've spoken with a few and are in that process. >> commissioner moore: this is obviously -- since this is a very sophisticated project and i'm looking towards director rayham, it's one of the things where the community and every facet of the community supports the department and spent a tremendous amount of time and architecture has done a great job and the project could
7:55 am
potentially, if no operator shows, because it's a small hotel with an unusual group housing operation, we can lose it. what guarantees do we have to have this project delivered to us? >> the project you are approving is a hotel with -- i forget the number of group housing rooms. >> commissioner moore: nine. >> so it could not turn to residential without your approval. >> commissioner moore: no. it takes some skill to do something like this. it's not a run-of-the-mill, okay, we're going to do a hotel. this is special. and what guarantees do we have that this will be delivered in
7:56 am
its current form? >> so the typical process is if a project comes in that's substantially not in keeping with what you see in front of you, it would have to come back to you. and a judgment call is made by the zoning administrator if the project were to change the hotel operator in and of themselves is not under our control and it often changes over time. the uses that you see here, configuration, number of rooms is whatted you see here with going up and down by only 5% to 10%. that's the rule of thumb. if it went up by 5% or down by 10%, we would bring it back to you. other than that, the project you are approving today is essentially fixed pretty much as you see it. and there's always a judgment call on the architecture and how much the architecture changes and whether or not we bring it back to you with the architecture. our strong desire would be to see it continue on. >> commissioner moore: it could be dumbed down. >> president hillis: we could
7:57 am
include in the notion that part of the approval is the design and quality of materials being presented to us. if that's in the motion and those get dumbed down later, the zoning administrator has more to stand on. >> commissioner moore: i would make a motion to add the qualifiers and the aspects that do, indeed matter, including the subtlies and the compromises and engagements that have been discussed today. if that is indeed what we're able to do, i make a motion that we approve. >> second. >> president hillis: there's a motion seconded to approve this matter with conditions as amended to include a condition that if significant design changes did occur the project would return to the planning commission on that condition. [roll call]
7:58 am
>> so moved, commissioners. motion passes than unanimously 6-0. that places us on item 14, 002825cua, 1965 market street. this is a conditional use authorization. >> good evening, elizabeth jonckheer, planning department staff. i've just passed forward a
7:59 am
revised motion that you should have been emailed yesterday, which includes some red line changes, as well as some afterpacket materials. the project before you would remove a portion of the existing building at 1965 market street as well as the surface parking lot on duboce avenue. a new 8-story residential building is proposed on the existing surface parking lot and vertical edition is proposed above 1965 market, which is an historic resource. the addition would be set back by approximately 35 feet along market street and 15 feet along duboce avenue. it would include below-grade
8:00 am
parking, 52 one-bedroom, 43 two-bedroom, and one studio unit. it would include 14 on-site, affordable units, pursuant to the housing program. the housing project includes 97 class 1 bicycle parking spaces and historic facility as well as a repair station and additional 12 class 2 spaces near the pedestrian entrances as approved by sfmta. the project is with two zoning districts. the project seeks conditional use authorization for a development of a large lot, over