for new. with regard to the questions that commissioner moore raised. the variance and a transparency question is that about the building form or does it extend into the plaza. >> for section 145.1 is for the plaza itself would not have the transparency itself but to follow up on the special obvious district i think through either method through the code amendment or the special use amendment you'll be describing the allowances in the as a way so you'll have to use the same terminal so i don't know if an su d would be more simple. >> that's helpful. i didn't notice this until

today, the two planters on the stockton street creates a wall if you're at human height which you clearly are. it steps the portion you're walking blank to blank and you're walking again but extends a portion there's a wall still. i understand the overly design i like the negative poise reflecting the structure within the building but when i think about a experience on stockton street loading to the town hall and stockton streets. just a quick note that was an issue that the department brought up it's an emergency egress there's an egress output

that's visible build into the wall we were hoping to bring that down but for emergency rooms it was not possible >> is that true of the other side there's a lift. >> that i'm not sure. >> all right. thank you. >> commissioner hillis. >> so i think this is pretty i mean even though we have a lot of legislation before us it's complicated it's straightforward and i think we're taking a large format retail building and redoing it the design is great and actually john is redesigning that building i like it a lot. i think you responded great about having the doors opened

and not just having the columns worked. i don't necessarily agree that you noted it for context but it worked well, with the demeanors you didn't noted the additional two columns on the side but they're there and you got approval. i like the way you addressed the side with the window on the stockton street side. i like the building and obviously a one hundred times better than the levy building. we're in this legislation issue we're responding to whatever legislation to build that building a large building behind a retail store and this is all one lot. i don't have a problem with the legislation and it being sporadic for this site whether

it's an su d. the plazas is being redesigned. i hear commissioner moore's comments i don't agree with her on this one. it looks good from a design standpoint when you're looking at it up close it doesn't work it's a bad plaza you don't feel liquor you should linger there the only good thing is the fountain but you want to move on because theirs nothing to do. i like the fountain on the back that will draw people in. realistically people will be using that it's a mid block plaza that's hard to use.

getting at the elements i think people would rather go to union square theirs more things to look at it rather than across the street with the nike building whatever is cross the street. you've got to give people a reason to be there and linger there. i kind of like the simplicity of the building i think it will be better utilized but maybe people will come in from off the street and the fountain is a go edition and hopefully, will lure people in. i asked the same question about the walls on each side of the walls. i like the symmetry ramp the wall. i think it gets us a better

designed plaza that's going to work it's never going to be the kind of plaza where people will just go there >> i too am supportive this is a aggressive design it is the honorable glass wall it's fantastic and will offer a great view of union square that doesn't excited now and be able to see folks ice skate will be go for all. the grand hyatt has done a significant amount of renovation. they have sort of a new bar and i think that willpower out to the plaza. this is not role a plaza it's a

garden courtyard so i think it will be used. one question is the apple store on stockton street down the hill remain open? that's important. so far as the fountain ho for our family that's liquor where's the waldo and my kids if i scalding asked them about the knowledge structures they can identify them quickly. that place it recognized for the fountain and not the plazas and apple has honored that with the lights. and the diagonally steps are awkward. i'm supportive and happy to see

that people recognize the fountain and artist and give the attendance they've given it and glad to see that and respected. one thing i want to point out that of the clever dollars a loading dock on post street at least in the drawings that's been came fwlaegd the whole hoyt hotel has kept it in zip code but fundamentally separate so those are my comments and i'm supportive of the project commissioner sugaya. >> i'll be in the planning commission tonight. i'm disjointed here i'll probably have to go through any notes. one thing that came to mind on the plazas is that the hoyt came before us a decade ago and asked

for some improvements to the plaza as i remember including the installation of stabilizes and chairs. at that time, we had a discussion about the fountain and i assumed that the plan in terms of the placement of tables and a chair is only like something people haven't figured out they'll go exactly there i assume. yeah. no. in our previous discussion about the hyatt putting in more furniture there were comments they should be kept away from the fountain because the ones you've got shown here are awfully close once it's implemented there's a conscious effort to keep them away from

the fountain so people can access that and move back and took pictures. also your proposing to have a water feature of some kind of which i assume also is excuse me. africa and not been detailed it's at least about one hundred and 17 photo away or so one hundred and 50 photo away it's pretty far back but i want consideration to making it a little bit i don't know how to say it less noisy i'd like it to be secondary to the fountain which is a little bubbly thing that shots up in the air. if this can be a quote water with not love disciplinarian

>> that's the kind of water that's smother. >> all right. great. then in terms of the fountain itself at least one aspect of that. there's a description of the preparation site preparation and moving and all that good stuff there isn't anywhere in the historic resource report anything to deal with the conservation. we do have an existing evaluation to look at. that there be any dosage of deration so there must be some conjecture questions i think it's sturdy but those conditions

be codified and i hope no replacement but at least conservation treatments recommended along those lines and there be a qualified conservative our to work on this during the process. i think that's the comment so if that can be incorporated that show should be part of the motion >> okay. back to the horrify the reason i asked the question open the conditional use and itself downtown authorization parallels are that staff is saying that losing 13 thousand some odd number of scapegoat is a positive thing. i think if you think about f it in terms of that amount of

retail being lost and the fact that apple we're not giving the approval solely duo to apple but some tenant motive come into m that space and deserves something bigger why we we want to lose 13 plus square footage that's not going toful. it also a bit solves the hoyt from having to build their observation deck because all of a sudden the 10 thousand square feet bonus that was given to them for that original project is now absolved because it's been reducing so where did they put the buns was it increased

height or something else now it soles we're a bit solving something they've taken advantage of and you don't know i don't think that's correct. letting see. on the exemption review i'm in agreement with the comments it effects a resource additional moving it and relocating it i don't think a bit solves the fact you need to consider it a little bit more in the environmental report. the other thing their jifgsdz in the environmental review why this particular this can - meets

the criteria for being in the conservation district. now let me say first it's a great building go about how farly done and probably about how farly decorated but one example we're arguing it creates a two-part composition we're be talking about a base that's this how; right? and it is under if i'm right it did he sends in the middle the demeanors have to be there and slide open-and-shut and there can't be a step there so all of a sudden we don't have a base

on, on package 9 it says it's a slightly raised entrance how on the one hand is there a substantial raised base and on the other hand, it's a slightly race base you do have a 3 part composition it didn't meet the criteria for that standpoint. there's also language in her that says projecting frame it's a classical material i'm going to go there. and it says that this emphasis open the center baits is a comeional dpoits as noted in the district delegates there's no buildings that are sighted dividing the thing into two

parts that doesn'tful. it also says while the metal pan paneling is not typical of the district etc., the majority of material is glass and in the conservation guidelines there are certain materials like panel that are beautiful colored that's not a masonry structure. i think i've talked about the fountain. and i think that i'll be

satisfied if the motion includes the conditions there be a conditional analysis and conservation recommendation made prior to the fountain being moved. so - . let's see. i've already covered some of this. and going to the planning code text changes i think following up on commissioner wu's comment especially her comment about secondary structures being used before. it seems strange to me in terms of it says the legislation with

respect to the number one conforms is actually to the entire property. so how can you single out or separate a structure you can't consider this a separated structure it's an integral part of the structure they've admitted it sits on top of ball room. but, you kno but, you know, i don't see how this can be applied and how the number one common part is solely the whole levi store when, in fact, the top of the hyatt is number one complying there's an issue here. maybe the city attorney has an

answer but perhaps if you're going to try to accommodate it on following up on commissioner wu's comment the su d would be a cleaner way >> let me address that i'll be interpreting this new definition this smaller structure is a acceptance drive structure but in terms of the legislation as it moves forward if there's other methods i think we can longtime that but this is how it's interpreted. >> i'm done.

>> i never know when you're done (laughter). >> commissioner moore. >> perhaps this is to create a definition of a secondary structure i've talked about architects who basically wouldn't call that a secondary structure bitsz it's independent of what we're doing. i have a request about the material of the common area the sidewalk on sutter and including going there to not the hoyt but on the west side of the alley back on stockton street and the corner of post have a brick side wall for the plaza and stairs to

create a brick surface on the entire complex floats. what are the thoughts will changing the materials all around the hyatt so the sidewalk is more uniform on sutter street down stockton street >> okay. so i'd love to do that. >> well, i'm posing a challenge because i'm not interested in seeing in front of the hyatt and a tracking up on sutter street a brick wall that all of a sudden ends and when the rest of the sidewalk going from the plazas all the way to stockton street becomes a different place the alley also has a brick now, when

the surfaces are obsolete how do we resurface it. we already have it junction on top of there's a change in side wall material. our proposal has been inside the property boundary we've been work so we have have not shown any sidewalk material outside of the hyatt hotel. we've included the change in the sidewalk material adjacent to the store on stockton street and the adjacent to the plaza and changes to the material we're looking a stoop in the plazas as opposed to the brick and looking at the concrete on the sidewalk that's more common to san francisco this is totally in

keeping with the - i can't answer that question this is outside the property lion but i'm sure we can discuss that >> i'll leave the planning department with a clear challenge to address that because the intentions is now being replaced to the pavement on the alley and on sutter street it becomes an oddity it we are trying to toy in union square. i'm in support of project but i want to add a condition. that the full accessibility of this project is being discuses with people liquor mr. planter

is one of the strong activists and respected persons in the mayor's office. we've got to do that ourselves it's our responsibility. i believe that the accessibility through this project is an afterthought. i modifying have been in the apple store i love going through it's excited. however, it's difficult for movement impaired people to find a spot and that is an condition for you to listen. i want this to be discussed by people who are experienced i want to see alternatives and a slow comboin ramp that revises

perpendicular where the architecture of the ramp become more a part of the plaza how it meets the second floor of the retail store. overwhelming this building and clearly impressed was never a two sided store it was a one-sided store. we need that challenge. >> commissioner borden. >> i think we wanted to take the motion separately. the first motion to approval the amended part >> second. >> i'm sorry. >> i want to make one comment about this and i think it's too late to do anything about it but

it should have been submitted to the hpgs and the answer from the state hospital was along the lines we recognize this as a historic resource but it didn't have to come before the commission. it says it here that there will be landmark buildings preserved but somebody had to make some judgment calls and a whether or not it would be effected. this triggers the requirement it go before the historic commission even though it's a round about negative fashion it's liquor saying there's a resource we know it's going to be effected so there's no impact

because the historic preservation commission will eventually looking at it anyway. and that didn't work >> commissioners is there's a motion and second on the floor to adapt the proposal. on that motion. - >> for the legislation. this is for item 15. on that motion. commissioner borden. confusing. commissioner moore. commissioner sugaya. commissioner wu and president fong. that motion does not pass as the vote is 3 to 3 with commissioners wu and

commissioner sugaya and another - >> but is this the responsibility - my it's the responsibili responsibility. >> commissioner borden. >> right i'm going to try to make a motion to approve the project with conditions outlined a additional continuing condition they work at accessibility issues around the plaza and second there's a conservation plan devised for the fountain and i forgot another thing. >> a condition analysis and conservation treatment prior to it being move forward. >> i think that's already been with the plans and specification. if you want to hear from the

project sponsor >> no, i think we're fine. >> so that's the motion. >> that's my motion. >> commissioner sugaya. >> second motion. >> no sorry. >> is there a second. >> yeah. second. >> just on the accessibility issue this is somewhat unusual we're doing this ever building has some level of review beyond why we're calling this out every building has got to have those requirements. >> it's a ada requirement not every project goes to the mayors for review prior to our approval we look at the design with the mayor's office of disability for suggestions. >