businesses downtown. we're concentrating open the neighborhood commercial districts i don't know that legislation is going to do much harm or, you know, it's pretty benign with the legislation that's been proposed by you take up commissioner antonini's comments to include subsidy 12 than 11. if you're loonlt the overall policies. then the other issue the timing is takes to get a cu approved by it seems like a long time for a formula retail question to be answered which probably sdournlz formula retail. it would be good to make that

process be quicker. it's not like an architecture review it's a basic question whether you want starbuck's or not but certainly this process could be sped up. commissioner moore >> i think generally this is a good beginning to give an overview their clear percentages of who's hear and for wasn't reasons. as we look forward i'm interested in finding the metrics of billion between the two of them. san francisco doesn't want to present it's to a hostile business policy but i'm looking for a physical discussion with the planning department to talk about the issues or only one starbuck's and one pete's in any neighborhood commercial corridor

that's ultimately the area i'm interested in. wyatt's what's dismissing is wages and salaries and what levels of responsibility we're talked about at the commissioner hillis indicated there should be some belief discussion about the part time vs. full-time the weekly accounting of what the wage is, however, if that person is a part-time person or full-time and does that person have a career path for any particular employment. those would be at least talking about the national trends i would be interested in. that would give us a slightly better feels of the cooperate

citizenship and what we're expecting here. i want to see more data on >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move on to item 13 was continued to march 13. i do have the request for continuance now for item 15 i don't know if i want to wait one more item or tackle it now >> now. >> for this at 4873 mission street requests for authorization we've received a request from the project sponsor to continue the matter in order for the sponsor to work with the

spifrts on this issue. >> okay any public comment on this item? on continuance. >> jessica do we have a date you want me to continue this matter to? >> i believe the date would be march 27 but i will consult with the project sponsor. >> march 27? arrest any any public comment? open the continuance. seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner sugaya >> i move to continue it to march 27. >> commissioners to march 27. commissioner antonini. commissioner hillis. commissioner moore. commissioner sugaya and president fong >> so moved, commissioners, that places you on item 14.

c-82 sutter street request for land use authorization. the case no. indicates such >> commissioner moore. >> i wanted to have one clarification on item 13 that was my request earlier to have an introduction overview of the subject finest from the day on which it's being heard was that formally acknowledged something we could do. >> i did not see a formal acknowledge. >> we're skipping over that we could have an independent meeting than the date. >> if we wanted to have an

informational meeting on the 6th would they need to continue. >> the matter is continued until the 13. >> since it's not an action item can it be continued. >> it can be calendar for the 6th. >> it would be on the plazas program. >> yes. >> yes. >> i will try to make that happen. >> my understanding is the reason they choose the 13 because they won't be ready on the 6. >> i'll take care of that. >> commissioners we're on item 14. >> i'm steven guy with the planning staff. that is the continued use to

demolish a parking lot. conditional use is for 50 feet in order to evaluate xashthd. it's located westbound the lower knob hill neighborhood it has numerous hotel and the retail uses are on the ground floor although not on all streets. the scale is generally 4 to 8 stories in height. the national registration district this district is a college of early 20th century structures the buildings are characterized by symmetrical penetration with shallow bays

and light chloral hydrate masonry materials. it's worked with the preservation staff. the project includes a well-defined pedestrian at the base as well as a tripod configuration. the scale of the building is in height with the subject on the block. it has a bulk head element. the preservation staff hearsay concluded it is consistent with the secretary of entire standards. it should be noted the project has no off street parking spaces required by the planning code. it's a park street reduction and that request will be actually, the genesis of the case being listed on the agenda.

so there's no variance associated with the project. but i should note it's located within a dense vibrant context within walking distance and the muni lines are available within blokes. the parking lots would require a removal of the parking space. so with the project it complies with the planning code and it provides housing within a dense urban context and the staff recommends it be approved. if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them >> project sponsor please.

good afternoon, commissioners john with rubin and rose on behalf of the project sponsor it is a projection of 6 stories with ground floor retail the project will removal a 22 space parking lot and it will be a rental project and provides two on site low rent spaces. there's no roof-deck proposed and religious as mr. guy mentioned there's no parking it's quite narrow so it would be difficult to provide parking and also provide any kind of retail space. it's well served by transit there's muni and bus lines it's a 10 minute walk from the muni station. the community is in support of the project and about a dozen

neighbors wrote about the concerns and we've dropped the height about 17 feet and held a neighborhood meeting we invited over 15 hundred people and the folks were in attendance and they were in support of a building occupying this current parking lot as their negativities reported from time to time there. i don't need to mention the city is in american people extreme housing crisis and the project sponsors is attempting to begin construction. and while there's a greater push for decent those days they need to be sensitive to the neighborhood there's dense apartment developments. the building steps down to the

slope of the street and the project supports the transit first in a transit rich area and provides a small neighborhood retail space. i'm going to turn it over to the retail sponsor to explain it more. >> good morning, commissioners president. i'm the architect of this project i'm going to go quickly through the images we've given you hard copies. those are context images within a block of the site the central part it the photograph of the parking lot. as it was said so = quantity

there's a mixture of styles and a pallet of materials that ranges from brick to unstuck could. this is the building with a rear yard we've sculpted the side of the building to provide local spaces into the adjacent side yard. this is the building on the street front it's the one next to the two-story garage. 83 and this is the context immediately on sutter. next. 3-d modeling showing the building and it's context. next. and what we've done to try to acknowledge the 3 story garage

and 4 story building we've created the shoulders to allow the facade to be narrowed a little bit. next slide please. that's a better view of what we're talking about. again next. we're looking back up the street. the store front is at this time to get a building in and we have retail space on the ground floor. the floor plans left one is the ground floor plan with the retail and the orange is the 20th century 2 bedroom apartment. the typically floor in the middle one bedroom unit and the top floor one bedroom in the front and two in the back.

section of this building will be built as a wood framed building over concrete. next. and next. and that concludes a brief presentation questions, i'll be happy to answer them. thank you >> open this up for public comment i do have two speaker cards (calling names). >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm reporting garcia i'm president of save our streets. we're gunning been in this area for over 25 years. i'm opposed to this project.

we have a downtown civic center area. in 8 square blocks there are 2 hundred and 79 buildings on the register of historic list. it's the most accidental populated area west of negotiate we don't have a supermarket or park or community centers we have nothing. our last park was union square and they turned it into a plaza. now on sutter street there used to be 3 lots where you could see back to the gardens in the back. every one of those blocks as a large area in the back you could see palm stresses now no

greenery left. if this one goes only one greenery left. it's too dense and too many people living here. it's over built. and the reason is that it was built as a masonry district after the earthquake to a houses the earthquake people in this case there was a storm. and it's disappearing the city is losing it's soul. we need to look at quality of life issues here. i had to wait two years for a parking space now we're losing another one. this should be reconsidered it's not a good fit for the neighborhood and the architecture doesn't blend in we

have autopsy types of architecture we have the farrell building and nova's arc and colonial spanish all kinds of buildings here and this one doesn't conform at all. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is donald witnessing at an i live at 3 hundred feet from the property on fulton street. i don't know if it was mentioned about a public meeting this was a petition that a group of us neighbors have signed opposing

the parking variance. i didn't know and gastroi don't know if anyone heard about the meeting last month. this notice of today's hearing is the first item i've received in 5 years. the group is signed this competition we simply oppose the loss of off street parking we don't have any other disagreement with the project it's been reduced in size but the liveability in san francisco does include off street parking for many people who couldn't simply live in the neighborhood if they didn't have a car and you have tow away zones in the morning and afternoons and

parking makes it difficult. we ask the commission to reconsider that aspect of the project. we would like to see it include off street parking. retail spaces in the neighborhood i've lived there for over 25 years retail spaces are vacant for a couple of years before they find a tenant for the space that we have we feel that another retail spacing space should replace off street parking. thank you >> linda chapman. >> linda chapman knob hill neighborhoods a historic position of knob hill neighbors we opposed adding parking is that a in particular we have

densely the about the and one of the things that makes it liveable is not having a lot of cars coming in and out. it actually is helpful to have one or two on site there's no parking at the curb there's meters or, you know, it's not the kind of place to get residential parking and if you don't have a car anyway people have to come and load and unload contractors and guests they have to have a place for awhile. garages for leasing for those people who have cars and that's a good thing to have off site parking for that. but for future reference 1 or 2 a good.

my main concern is the facade. i'm really surprised that the conservatism staff thoout thought that would fit in. the retail space is suitable to the rest of the neighborhood but this design doesn't the consist of light and dark it reminds me of the strange projection like awnings reminders me of the thing that was designed to be built up in the other historic district the one that's not on the national register. it should be continued otherwise the e m r is a bad idea this is

steve tobaccoers analysis why the e my is a bad idea. there was a report from the mayor's office of housing they came in and said it was not effective and steve said eliminate subsidies i know the problem with the deficit equity in the building yes. i paid my 77 special will assessment some were more than that so i suggest putting the money in the mayor's office of housing for a small building like this would be a better idea. >> hello, i'm christopher ward i

live directly next to that building. as a matter of disclosure i'm the building manager for a mettle company. my biggest concerns about this building are the security of my building and the security of buildings that share my backyard that's been given which is easily assessed by the twenty-four hours open parking lot. the twenty-four hours open parking lot unfortunately, it's managed twenty-four hours anyone can walk into that space. by putting a building here almost any building that would have the access to the backyard and to my building and to the

properties that are against that yard that would be 800 sutter street and the businesses at that location and they have break-ins at 839 jones street and other. this security would be, you know, this building would w be a benefit we have similar roof heights once you get access to one of the buildings i get access to all of them. it solves the noise that the buildings that face south on bush street and another big thing is, you know, parking the zip car i approached zip car to ask about a security for that

lot, however, they declined. therefore because they're not willing to participate in securing the neighborhood again, i have no resolutions about this building being built i don't live 4 hundred yards i live next door. i wish it was a prettyer building. let's be serious all the things look the same they're just old eventually i'm going to be old. i encourage this type of growth it's obviously not a big building there's a concern because the people who manage

that lot do illegal u-turns to get access to that lot >> thank you. >> item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini >> yeah. i think this is a good project for a lot of the same reasons but i have concerns about the design basis. the architect has done a good work with the punched windows and with the bay you know the different elements of the building to blend in. i have a couple of suggestions. i think the color of the building could be just slightly darker. i wouldn't make it a lot darker but they did building open the street are more beige.

i want to see the correspondence at the top of the building it seems like an awning there if we could make it a stronger correspond it would speak to the other buildings in the neighborhood. i know we have restrictions so long as they meet the seismic conditions that will work out fine. those are the main things perhaps some sort of i know the two sides are supposed to help support the cornerstone of the adjacent building but something that speaks to the line between where it steps up to the next level there are no setbacks. it's well-designed and i'm a big fan of having parking on site

but if this is what the sponsor wants to do i doubt they can get 20 parking spaces there i'm familiar with the area. i often walk there at night it seem like most of the garages never are full. east of tloorl their jammed up but west of taylor their vacancies like 5 to 9 o'clock at night that's traditional it's not a shopping district. so i think that with those changes i think it's a good project and does have on site affordable that's an option that's available i can go for either one. they've made the different

commits to make the blow rental market on site. those are my main feelings on the building. commissioner hillis >> it's a tough neighborhood it's a great san francisco neighborhood but that the architects have again, a good job in making it look like it was built around today, the masking works so i think the design works. i think the retail is great to have on the ground floor and kind of a similar in design for the retail at the cornea of sutter as you know east. if there's anywhere in the city we should be getting rid of parking