thousand parker spaces and the desk was given in november 17th of 2000 but, of course, since 13 then e then there was the.com bubble and 9-1-1 happened to the project was on hold. so 2378 in 2005 it was resubmitted this time as a two building residential with 48 units and it was 52 thousand square feet 5 stories and zero bicycle spaces and the final negative desk was issued in 2005. but, of course, right now right after that in february 2006 had a moratorium so the project was again on hold. and in 2008 we had an economic

meltdown. finally in 2009 the eastern neighborhood zoning passed and although that happened this project was slated as a tyrone type two pipeline project that was grandfathered in for a previous status which had a 55 feet he heightened limit but despite that the project sponsor revised it under the new eastern neighborhoods plan. so what you get is what we have today and that's 2 residential buildings with 4 studios and 15 two beds and it's only 45 thousand square feet and has 39 class one bike spaces. the affordability is up 14.4 percent and the owner the

project sponsor is going to be paying impact fees. this is just to give you an idea of the general area. the layers point doesn't work on the tv. this the adjacent to a 280 and next to the uc sf compass there's a lot of new development to the north and southeast as well. it's to give you an idea of the type employment that will be coming into this area that will be crying for new residential area. this is just a general idea that you see right now at the site the upper image shows a lot of the by a person to the building

you can see across the development poster of 2000 of all the medical stuff kaiser is going to be building there. the picture on the bottom shows the adjacent to the railroad and one thing you notice there's a ton of windows it on the property line of the adjacent building and this was something we felt was a design challenge to accommodate to be a good neighbor. here's again, just around the site. you can see the railroad studios just on the top and just to the right of that it is new big multiple family development as well. and to the south you can see the context it is in 280 which will be potentially lowered in the

future. here's what we're proposing. as you can see multiple family residential with the ground floor is residential as well but fitting in with the ground floor residential plan their set back and one thing you notice is the clean up area around the railroad tracks for parking and landscape and the project donor helped that to happen. it's 37 units there are 152 bedrooms and the total space is 25 thousand 350. and this design we've actually

got 40 percent over the required open space. and, of course, we're going to meet the b m rs that we talked about. there's going to be 2, two bedrooms and one studio. and again before we had no parking spaces now there will be over one-on-one ratio of class one bike parking spaces. this is the context you'll see on the existing building 1 thing is 17th street dead-ends it's not a viable pedestrian area for commercial because there's no thoroughfare people are by passing this altogether.

it's landlocked that's why we felt with that and the influx of believes for employment there's a big need for residential. here's the building as we're proposing the thing you'll notice is the ground floor is set back as we mentioned. it's also not any higher than the railroad lost building it actually meets the top of the building as it comes down and a fits in nicely. this is a rendering to give you an idea of one of the porches. you'll notice the trains in this ground floor. here's the entry on 17th street into the main lobby. this is the entry on

pennsylvania avenue as well. this is the existing site plan as you see today. the building just to the northwest of our building is the garden building and just to the north well i won't say north technically west it's adjacent to us and that's the wall of all the windows on the property line i mentioned earlier. so this is our proposed site plan. you can see we tried to accommodate those windows so none of those windows will be blocked and we're meeting the open space of the garden area with our building to the left in the image. here's the ground floor plan.

as you'll see the step back on the parking. one thing all the bicycle are assessable to the lobbies and to the entrance and exits of the building. this is the open spates it shows you the podium level courtyard pa has our rear yard it will be mostly green and pretty open. you can see on this one we stepped down down to 40 feet the new zoning requires a 40 foet foot set back so we go from 40 to 48. the vertical is what you're seeing is to try to mimic

>> thank you, sir your time it up. >> any public comment open this item. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. opening it up to commissioners. >> i have some questions for the project sponsor whoever wants to address them. this may have to do with the zoning of the eastern neighborhoods but you only have 17 parking spaces. is that the maximum your loud >> no. we're allowed three-quarters per unit we're under. >> any particularly reason? >> it's part of the sdoep. we have it's at right in the zoning and we felt we needed

some parking as well to go but under the maximum amount so we felt we have a good balance of less than 50 percent >> but you're saying as a right you could have had 75 percent and a correct. >> that's a little bit usual. and i would expect there's going to be more building around there so it will be denser and denser especially, if you're correct there's a plan - can you hear me sorry - . freeway possible plan for the freeway would make sense so that's good. and then also you were grandfathered in for the

particular affordability and you electively are going higher by the way, you could have 12 percent >> correct and we could be higher. >> you went 14. you could have been approved for 12 >>right. >> those were my main questions i just didn't understand those two parts of it but it looks like a good project. it will be for sale for condos. yeah. i don't have too many other questions it's a well designed project and will fit in, well as this area develops further >> commissioner moore. >> i'm generally interested in this project it's affordable housing on an affordable

priority site. it does a majority of the things right. i have a couple of questions and suggestions. the issue i raised a week ago are the same issues i would raise here is the live ability and quality. i'd like to make a question to the developer and architect are as follows: and this requires you to engage with me. the draft ground floor where the dine guidelines which have long been presented to you and endor endorseed require the privacy standard the porch or the patio is at least 3 feet above grade in order to meet privacy.

being next to the freeway in an open frontier situation i would think that requirement is more important. i'm not suggesting to raise the building but i'm suggesting we look at the sidewalk in front of this this on pennsylvania avenue it's a 15 feet wide sidewalk in a relatively low density 15 feet sidewalks are downtown and 17 are typically in neighborhoods. the question i'm asking and i'm addressing the zoning operator can we suggest that the developer puts a 3 feet planter in front of the unit on the first floor union tennessee 1 and 2 in order to achieve the

objective of the guidelines and street. that's my first question >> so any obstruction in the public right-of-way would require the approval from the public works that they could authorize we don't have final authority for issuing allowances for encroachments into the public right-of-way. >> can we between the departments hold up the standard of live ability and quality that we can engage in a discussion about this particular sidewalk a 15 foot sidewalk which is basically a lower street and i would rather see the building frontage be more protecting the

unit with landscaping and snaem your pinching the sidewalk at the expense of this but still maintaining all the improvements on the street edge. >> i said your point i think it's well-taken and we can work with the project sponsor and get some more greenery in that public zone. i don't think the commission can make it a condition but we can encourage it >> i want the vice president to work because we're moving into steroidal building to residential areas and he think

we need to have a certain give-and-take and redefine the sidewalks to accommodate that. i'm making a legal gesture. i can't ask you at the moment. the second point i'd like to make and i appreciate your support director at least on the idea. the second point i want to make is last week, i quoted bush street the commission sent the project balk because the unit empowers on the interior public walkways came by the bedroom window but here the sidewalks effect the live built on the

second floor for units 201 and 4 and 5 and 8. considering flipping the planters which are posted on the evidently of the kwaurdz and put planter in front of the units themselves in order to protect the privacy of the bedrooms and allow for operable windows on the side. i want the architect to comment on that. we're not building hotels we're building full friendly units. if mr. king you're the one chronological to speak >> shawn on behalf of the project spokesperson. we view those as welcome good thought-out ideas.

so far as the encroachment the promise sponsor will have the standards and protocols and we'll seek out the ideas and flipping the planters is something we'll look at. whether the planter is 2 and a half or 3 and to keep the view to protect the ground floor unit. i'm absolutely delighted to hear the continuation of last weeks meeting ultimate i resulted in going forward >> i'm happy with those suggestions. i just said to talk about the sidewalk with i'm not sure i

trefrpt iowa what commissioner moore said but we have to have a wider sidewalk to anticipate future density and more communication hopefully with mission bay and many of our swauksdz in many parts of the city are not as generous. i i know that 16 the street is going to be a major corridor and allowing room for bus transit would restrict it a little bit more but on 17th street it wouldn't be a problem. >> the 15 feet for this project comes from the better streets plan, which requires projects of a certain size to do improvements like sidewalk widening and basically every

street is categorizations and there are residential street microwave there could be a mix in this neighborhood so we would require the minimum sidewalk weight be 15 feet. >> just to be clear it's not putting the planters is not in conflict. >> no, it includes street trees and furniture and furnishings and so on. >> thank you that clarifies it. fits not the expense of the weight but using it nor greenery

>> just a question for the project sponsor why did you decide to build two separate buildings. >> because of the proximity of the 280 we have a acoustic problem so we decided to put two unit that face the squared and we have no sound problems. >> i think in the future we have two lots i wouldn't mind those being like two buildings i like the design. i don't think this lot is two large but to have the buildings on one lot would be a finer grade and a commissioner wu >> i'm also supportive of the

sidewalk and the commissioners possibly looking at planters according to what the dwp would allow. so i actually move to approve the project with asking staff to work with the project designer on commissioner moore's suggestions >> second. >> commissioner. >> yes. maybe it's only my impression but are we getting a lot of requests prominently to approve residential within the u m u and if that's the case perhaps staff can take a look at that and perhaps give us some memo. i'm afraid the entire thing is going to turn into residential >> call the question, please.

>> commissioners on that motion to approve the plan with conditions to include a condition that the staff continue to work with the sponsor on improved privacy open the ground floor. >> on that motion (calling names) . >> i think the way we say the motion left out that we're not just talking about the ground floor on pennsylvania avenue we're talking about all the upper floors facing the kwaurdz where bedroom unit asked the planter to be flipped away from the squared edge and the - edge.

>> okay. on that amended motion then (calling names) so so moved that commissioners that places you on item this or that for case no. 13002 c at the bayshore boulevard requests for authorization. >> your second.

>> if you're ready. good afternoon, commissioners erica from planning staff. you have before you to establish a formula retail grocery stores doing business as a retail building and within an zoning district and a visitation special east. it has a reconfiguration of the assessor parking lot to have additional landscaping and the closure of one criteria. we have received 6 comments and it provides immediate access to

a greater assess of goods and services. they must talk about the formula uses and the formula retailer services and the citywide within the district. the commission must consider the capability of the aesthetic character of the district. a survey within the nc district revealed there are two similar retail outdoors and 5 vacant commercial spaces within the district. they far outnumber the rezoning district. given the vntsdz discussed staff recommended approval to allow the establishment of a formula retail use, expansion of park in excess of the amount in the

codes. that concludes my presentation i'm available for questions >> project sponsor. >> good afternoon knickers mar counsel for the project. here to speak for bill coil and the director of construction also present is our architecture the architect for the project and my colleague who's a lee lot younger than i i'd be lost without her. as you can see from the staff report in your commission package we come here with the part. >> of staff and numerous companies including the visitation valley project and

the san francisco brown bombers. we also come with the support of any residents. as a consequence we hope this will be a non-controversial matter and we'll make our team available to answer any questions. as ms. jackson said its on bayshore boulevard. the building open the site as constructed as a safe way grocery stores and included an asphalt parking lot. it's with the retailer company. prior to this site it was used by safe way including big lots. grocery outlet seeks this retail space and therefore they require a land use in order to open for business on this site.

they will be providing 50 off street parking spaces. although those spaces currently exist in the asphalt lot the determination it was required for the most recent opulent i occupant hadn't used those. the groceries is a third generation owned business established in 1946. they're known for providing low-cost option forces their customers they have fresh vegetation and meat and other items. they want to return the site to a whole service grocery stores. here's an image of the site. it's design is a product of the

time and function. it's straightforward but it includes some mutual landscaping and some fencing which they will keep. the parking lot is a plan asphalt lot that was screened along sunny vail avenue. it tends to add street trees along the parking lot within the area. to that end the grocery outlet has should with the planning alliance to identify the foliage and plants that would enhance the site. they planning plan on removing a curve to have a wider sidewalk. i'm going to go to the site brian plan.