before you unfortunately, we have this opportunity to receive direction. >> it is very interesting since we're having a building with a double corridor in the west facing part of the project in the same corridor in the eastern part of the site it is the western side we'll ask for the racking of the building on the 45 that's the sun direction we're tdr in it will effect a couple of units will maple rest. paul the outdoor i'm not going to tell you what you do but a need to adjust the building to those requirements we're asking for the outcome as well. >> commissioner dave i want to

provide clarification open the planning code requirement in the inner courtyard the 45 degree plain provides for open space for the open space and in this instance the project is meeting the requirement through the roof deck the exposure requirement is a courtyard dimension of 25 feet open the first 2 floors and a set back with the kind of way to think about it it requires basically an additional 5 feet on the 3rd floor. >> that is the 45 degree angle i'm speaking but with a little bit of adjustment it is not undoable

i think this is really important as we move forward as we move into this area with largely sites a lot to get a high-count that is cognizant that the future building we're building nice unit they fully address the availability that's how i encourage it. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i'm in general agreement about the position of the building on this site the only thing i'll say is that i hope we don't run into the same issue the board of appeals had i strongly support this unit mix it's difficult in the buildings to get new buildings would with two bedrooms let alone 3 bedrooms and show you they have the mix

set up around the courtyard this is looks like mostly two and three bedrooms facing did courtyard i hate this is 2 or 1 bedrooms or studios peppering we need to start prioritizing those units but anything the design team can go to alleviate that maybe instead of 2 open the south side maybe a 2 one of the bedrooms be a little bit of a weird set up i'll encourage you to keep the mixed use as possible my other comment on the consent calendar i'm hierarchical supportive of this on the flip side we have 5 or 6 other

projects going up in the same area but overall the neighborhood at the end of the day is going to be fantastic i love you have flex unit on the one story when you didn't replace ground floor retail as those buildings are going up i live in motorbike i'm in adaptive a lot i'm on this - it is dark and bleak this is despite the fact new buildings are going up i'd like to ask the project sponsor did you all consider ground floor retail. >> what is the true retail space going for the flexion whether residential use thank you for the comment regarding the commercial space we considered it and in

communication with dna it came up members of the dna or members of the community that didn't want to see anything and ultimate in discussion they agreed with the scheme it has no commercial space it would not have accumulated cafe and had a 10 foot ceiling height on that corner so we worked on that decision i know the school across the street my impression that will bring additional car traffic which at this time the traffic is related to the residential use so we opted not to do that blue

the flex in the current application before you there is no 3 bedrooms designated as below market rate we chpgd that one of them is and that was something we worked on in discussion with our superintendant they asked it we did that so it is really and truly a difference mix. >> i love it on the affordable housing on the application i think we're highly supportive i'm i'll say that is something i'll keep push on the bottom i understand some of the neighborhoods on particular projects as a whole it is a mistake for the neighborhood to push all the commercial to third street and particularly 32 it will be detrimental to the community and project by project

people don't want to see more activity overall we'll see a block with nothing on it with a push back or business case not having retail and again i think there are other public comments been the streetscape and working with the departments with the parking garage and things like that we'll see an effective condition and maybe you guys go back a little bit on design hesitate an mta or dpw issue another agency we're looking that this is of a concern first of all, thank you. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. a few things i'm supportive of the project i'll agree with the other commissioners with do nuance things as brought up by commissioner moore i know we've

gotten a copy of the hawkins agreement a question for the city attorney if it is possible as we know cost of hawkins prevents setting of rent that were created after 1995 until a direct financial or consideration given to the project i haven't read in great detail i was occurring what satisfies that requirement on the project that the - in the cost of hawkins agreement if you don't know now there has to be a consideration that allows us to let that happen. >> i did not work on this easement i'll read through that the planner may know what the tradeoffs are often it is a

relief from set back requirements for area ratios those kinds of things i don't know what is at issue. >> ♪ instance since the commission is considering modifications so for example the tradeoffs to the rear yard as well as to the exposure those would be for example, as well as the permitted obstructs or obstructions gives the city - >> thank you. i think they bend the decision we hear it and sometimes the public will ask about it the only other thing i think about they've done a wonderful job erecting particularly on the 10th street part the building faces paralyzed or tennessee but larger on the other street if you take your clues almost all

have moldings around the window of different color i'll encourage you to work with staff and it might intend to individualize the black molding or some craft color or the rich brown to make those windows stand out and tie-in with the rest of the neighborhood that is an idea and the other thing many of the buildings have in the neighborhood but those are more the industrial or commercial public buildings is have anarch form on the upper part of the window rather than the straight form across there but the setting off those windows will probably be a nice touch see what the other commissioners have to say and

finally i agree with commissioner johnson i think that you know maybe not this project specifically but those newer neighborhood you directive around to look places for retail and a lot of times there isn't any i know you need a critical population but in dog patch we're starting to see that but perhaps in one the flex basis it provides a you know cleaners or some of the other things neighborhood need to have easy for the patrons not to get in the car and directive somewhere and finally ask you to work carefully with the folks the school may have changed their name i remember that and any other schools in the area to inform them of the construction process so they're aware of

certain times might be pile driving and things that are disturbing they can prepare the school to do whatever they can to adjust their schedules it is a good project. >> commissioner richards. >> i like the project a lot i met with the partnerships i guess 3 questions to commissioner moore's points on the exposure in the courtyard two feet or 2 1/2 feet on the first two floors and 10 additional on the ground or fourth floor. >> correct. >> if the courtyard was to provide a minimum of 25 needed e feet the number of unit that require exposure will be reduced

25 feet the bottom two floors meet the exception. >> on the redesign. >> thanks thank you for the opportunity to respond to this comment we q, have it at 25 feet at one point we have the opportunity to work with the staff we don't development to work with the commission unfortunately those are great comments they're coming to us at the hamburger towards the end of the project but the projects approval but good comments i can wide it easily but the architects i know what i can and can't do i can widened the courtyard 3 feet or take some of the corridors but it is a mall this and does - i can take a foot out

of each unit not leary large or small an average 2 bedroom is very liveable this will make this smaller; is that true? for the benefit of the courtyard i can do that when we made the decision to make it bigger this was a trade off for the facade in particular, the 3 foot cigarette on the top floor those units really got a big hair cut the ones facing tennessee street and the and it makes it better for the separation from the street we took off some dimension in

the courtyard. >> you'll need to make it 10 feet. >> right now, we're 10 feet in width and it makes sense aeshthd or architecturally to widen the courtyard deep the walls straight needs to be an "x" potential exception but i've folded been involved with a decade we did a 11 story building with a courtyard. >> water source that was approved unanimously by this commission i can easily make the change don't have to redo the drawings but get the 3 extra feet when we made that change we increased the size of the roof deck and that's what you see the

roof deck takes up two legs of the building didn't take up any of the tennessee street not to have a railing or a parapet wall so this was a comment it was to really cap that visibly at 40 feet. >> i guess to commissioner antonini and commissioner moore i wonder how many retail are involved this concerns me and talked about this yesterday i'm not sure having a flex space so someone will get there i hope - i intend to disagree with the neighborhood you have a convenience store that serves the close neighborhood so you

know i guess to come back to staff you'll hear from some of the commissions really trying to push for retail instead of being in the dark. >> i hear that commissioners as part of issue you're seeing in those projects is many of the projects approved have not been built what you're hearing is no the critical mass of marketing to this is we hear you. >> and lastly i encourage you as the commissioner antonini 80 said to work the school i'd like to make a motion to prove the revised project are the anytime 25 foot courtyard 25 can somebody help me to

create. >> correct 25 feet is the minimum basis for exposure and extends up if if the courtyard were 25 foot only 6 unit will require a modification i guess i'll defer to commissioner moore. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to have the condition by which the building didn't go 25 feet up but meets the exposure plain it starts as you described and resembled a 45 degree angle the reason even the 25 feet of the parking space is 20 foot long what you like to live 25 feet with our main living space away interest the window i don't think missouri

any of us wanted that i want more than just the 25 foot on the courtyard side but the proper response to the exposure requirement it will be certain unit will not meet the requirement because of the corners etc. and that will work out the way it does he don't want the courtyard encouraging modification of the unit requirement i want liveability to be the main driver i think you have all the tools you were great describing the possible architect what you can do with the main corridors all the tools are there so we would like to insure the greatest height i'll make a motion that is part to the beginning of the motion it

commissioner richards formulated and that's all and the project has the support on all other levels >> to provide clarity to the commission our exposure requirement in the code are somewhat not as clear the project will have to have for exposure a 25 foot courtyards open the first and second and the courtyard open the third and fourth level that's how the projects has to respond to the dimension. >> may i ask, sir please confirm that's the interpretation of what the urban design team discussed and that meets their expectations. >> we didn't get into this specification we thought generally about the character and the quality of the

experience both from the unit and the courtyard overall. >> then i think we'll be going with the way the code described it proximate we're getting enough light and air both those new unit on their own they'll provide good living space will be better when there is more privacy across the way. >> commissioner johnson. >> commissioner wu i want to ask what happens on the upper floor i heard 25 for the first two floors and thirty for the third and 35 to the fourth i don't want to lose larger sized bedrooms for that

exposure a trade off in terms of the number of bedrooms and also - but the privacy and exposure issue maybe staff can answer first. >> pardon me commissioner. >> if beer asking the proposal i believe to ask for 35 feet open the fourth floor in terms of the the woigd of the width of the courtyard what will that do to the unit in terms of number of bedrooms he, etc. >> more than likely it will reduce the size of the unit vast and require more modifications that are not as clear you'd remove the requirement for a dwelling unit x potential modification and the hawkins agreement needs to have a trade off that the city is giving so

the main components are the rear yard and the exposure you can lessen for example the amounts of exposure and lessen the amount of the unit that's in my opinion. >> i'm open to a discussion i think that sxoer i also will be open to 25 foot courtyard all the way up i know there is privacy concerns but for the people on the one story they have 25 feet across so we're saying that's okay. but also okay for the folks on the third and fourth floor maybe we can discuss. >> commissioner richards. >> i'll let commissioner moore speak first. >> i'd like the architect tolgd briefly comment on the unit shift, etc. and again there is thirty feet and 35 feet and whatever he will 12-hour period

that's another possibility for variance if we see the challenge thank you, again i want to point out something that nobody's talking about this is a south facing courtyard and not necessarily what i call a land lock sites directly to the set is a prominent building that is going to be there and quite large set back from the property line this is facts of on this courtyard that is part of the discussion that we've had with the neighborhood and planning staff and with the size and shape of the courtyard we are really this is part of you can't why the courtyard is oriented the way it is in terms of what i

can do architecturally i can add dimension but not 25 feet or 40 feet are the dwelling units if we our ratio goes down and the light we're losing quite a few unit i, easily do you know in looking at the design and without making pursuant not liveable 25 feet occupying all the way up i'll be willing to agree to as a condition of approval today like i said on projects that i see in front of the commissions dwelling unit exposure is something common and typical on residential project with a courtyard design. >> i've been on this commissioner eir commission for 9 years in new construction on

the larger sites i've never seen a project so unit driven and requires 21 unit to ask for that exception i'm basically concerned about privacy that commission approved you wouldn't do mind staying there i'm communicating with you this commission approved a project on mission we are that not concerned about 50 photo separation i happen to are a have a friend he can sit in her united and watch television across the way i want to prevent that we're basically i'm at home, i see the wine bottles the other person is pull out of their refrigerator it is for

that reason and again in some creative approach to how you do it is where the challenge lies not 25 foot up with two or three buildings facing each other that is not something i will support. >> commissioner richards. >> thank you commissioners dan with reuben, junius & rose for the project sponsor i'd like to speak to the contra costa to hawkins issue as commissioner antonini mentioned state law did ordinarily prevent the city from restricting the rent from onsite unit only in a bonus given to a project the dwelling unit exposure modification is the only part of the project approvals that jatsz additional

square footage for the project so if there is in dwelling unit exposure modification our ability to 0 did 0 onsite utilities unit it put in jeopardy. >> where i'm coming from on the market street project here we are in a debated deadlock i hope to ask you can come back with one or two alternative we'll see the impact oh, we don't like that trade off but instead of 50 percent can we have a 40 or thirty percent exposure so commissioner johnson and commissioner wus point are we trading off given where we are in the past experience we able able to look at this i'm going to ask for continuance this to

come back with a couple of design schemes and i think there is a misunderstanding if they're able to have a 25 foot courtyard only 6 you are talking about have the exposure. >> only the unit that have access that are gaining exposure on the first and second floors which are a modification or exposure in total that's 6. >> so 6 out of 20. >> the current scheme is 21. >> okay so 6. >> okay. >> so the privacy issue is what i'm battling about and i can't let that go because we have plenty of sro's and units in this town that fully understand and fully suffer from the liveability aspects of those kinds of united and a big

building this would be a major mistake. >> would a couple of weeks do anything for you folks to try to make that better. >> if the condition of approval today were to require a 25 foot wide courtyard is something we're comfortable alleging to now we're confident we can do that and very much like to go with an approval for two foot wide courtyard today. >> you said you expressed it clearer you're asking for 25 feet vertically on the building. >> that's correct for the entire building. >> commissioner if i may interject the chapter for the