conditioned in provided motion and finds that the project is on balance consistent with the objectives and policies of the general plan. no tenants will be displaced as a result of the project. and the project will not result in net loss of dwelling units on the property and instead will provide two, two-family sized dwellings. that concludes my presentation. i'm available for questions. >> president hillis: thank you. project sponsor, welcome. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm one of the project owners at 284 roosevelt. like our planner just said, we bought the project last year, somebody had exceeded demo. so it was illegally demoed structure, but it was a single-family home. we worked with staff, residents in the neighborhood early, decided it was a good candidate

for a two-family dwelling so we decided to approach that. we needed to go through the conditional use because it was already essentially demoed. and so, we reached out to the neighbors pretty early, a lot of involvement from property owners. they were anxious to see something happen here. we added 300 square feet to the previous 3600 square feet approved, divided that equally into two units, each has one car parking and that's where we're at. and the architect is here if you have questions, as well as me regarding specifics. >> president hillis: great, thank you. we'll open it first up to public comment. any public comment on this item? seeing none, we close public comment. >> commissioner richards: so this is not the typical exceeding the scope of work demolition we've seen, mr. eastwood is not the person who

did it. i'm glad he came to agreement with all the neighbors. i did read comments from the neighbors on both sides, including one, a former employ here, mr. hart. i see no reason not to approve this. i think we should -- you should get it going as fasts you can, move to i prove. >> president hillis: second. are we approving the revised plan? great, thank you. >> commissioner moore: we need to ask the department, is the department has examined the plans? i have not, i couldn't pull them up last night, it was too late. mr. washington have you seen the plans and compared them to the agreement so we can trust your judgment, otherwise i say i need to see the plans. >> we have briefly seen the plans and they seem to be relatively modest alterations, but they are consistent with our

policies and consistent with the residential guidelines and we're pretty happy with the final result. >> so could we restate the three conditions to be met. the front setback has been increased, the building elevation materials confirmed and lastly the front deck has been eliminated, is that a correct recap of the conditions? >> yes. the front setback has been increased from 15 to 17 feet. the depth of the third floor roof deck from 5-10 feet and the sponsor will have all building elevations clad in rustic siding. those are the three conditions of the neighbors. >> thank you. >> president hillis: jonas? >> clerk: on this motion, then there is a motion and second to approve the matter with conditions as has been revised and submitted by staff for the

record. fong aye johnson aye koppel aye moore aye president aye. so moved, that motion passes unanimously. 6-0. case number 2017 -- 01058. conditional use authorization. 1443 nor yegga street. flashflush the subject property is developed with a three story building with commercial and upper floor residential. configuration is to improve.

the department of public health found no reported complaints for the current operator for the subject location, but the planning department has no record of complaints. the department received one anonymous public comment in opposition of the proposal concerned that it will be bring prostitution to the area. the department is in general support of the project. the proposed is not for retail use, providing goods to the neighborhood. it would allow expanding services to the neighborhood and is consistent with the policies of the general plan. this concludes my presentation. >> president hillis: thank you. project sponsor. are they here? is the project sponsor here? no?

so is there any public comment on this item? i think that case report was sufficient. are you the project sponsor? >> sorry. >> president hillis: that's all right. come up. >> ok, i'm the expediter for income and design and representing sweet and smile massage for the hearing. this is located on 1443 b, south side of noriega street and they're requesting from foot massage to body massage. we're only proposing the improvement and without changing any building exterior.

i have been to this massage place for measurement. this place has three existing massage rooms, with low partition wall. there is no way to have any sexual activity with this kind of design. and also, there is no showerroom. in this facility. and i also take some picture of this interior space. i will provide it as necessary. and also, we can refer to the yelp online. there is no indication on yelp that this facility has any sexual activity. the proposal of the business hours for this massage will be 10 a.m. in the morning to 10

p.m. in the evening. and this change of use has no impact for the neighborhood. so i hope planning commission can kindly approve the application. >> president hillis: thank you. so we'll open this up to public comment if there is any. seeing none, we close public comment. commissioners? >> commissioner richards: i move to approve. >> second. >> clerk: thank you on the motion then to approve this matter with conditions, commission fong aye. johnson aye. koppel aye. moore aye. richards aye. president aye. so moved, that motion passes unanimously, 6-0. item 18, case number 2016. at 2 lu pine avenue, this is conditional use authorization.

good afternoon, commissioners. chris may of planning department staff. you have before you a request for conditional use authorization to permit the construction of a two story single-family dwelling on a vacant portion of the subject property in the presidio heights neighborhood. it's zoned rh-3 and in the 40 x height and bulk district. it permits dense sit of one dwelling unit between one thousand square feet of lot area in the rh-3 zoning district. the project proposeses to construct a two story, approximately 796 on the vacant portion of the property. the subject lot is approximately 6300 square feet. the proposed new building is set back 11 feet from the front lot

line. the project also proposes common use in the rear yard and front setback areas totalling a thousand square feet for the occupants of the existing 5-unit building. the project has evolved significantly since the original submittal. responses to comments from the residential design advisory team, they no longer propose a third floor. it is now set back from the lot line to provide code complying setback and no longer proposes a garage. they are not seeking variations from the planning code. the department has received one e-mail in opposition to the proposed project for the property owner at 4 lupine avenue. citing the loss of sunlight and privacy as concerns. the planning recommends that the

commission approve the project, it represents the sensitive infill of a large irregularly shaped lot within the allowable density and it's on balance. and the residential design guidelines. this concludes my presentation. >> president hillis: thank you. project, response -- project sponsor? mr. may, do you know -- mr. freen, you're the project sponsor? welcome. >> commissioners, president hillis, my name is gerald green, i'm here on behalf of the project sponsor. we've had a chance to consider the department's conditions of approval. we've worked with mr. may and at this stage we have nothing more to add except we hope that you will accept the department's recommendation and we're here if you have questions.

>> president hillis: thank you. we'll open it up to public comment. one speaker card. if others would like to speak, line up on the screen side of the room. you just need to speak in that mic right there. >> thank you, and good afternoon. i am the owner of 4 lupine avenue. >> president hillis: you can point to the overhead. so we can hear you, too. >> 4 lupine avenue is right here. as you can see, there is sunlight currently hitting the apartment building. 4 lupine is eight-unit apartment building. many of the apartments face the proposed project. here is a picture of the window

of apartment number 5 in 4 lupine. the window overlooks, you see that tree, that tree will be taken down. and that is where the building is going to be. there is only about 20 feet between 4 lupine and the proposed project. and therefore, yes, we are opposed to this. it's creates shade and adversely impacts 4 lupine. i am sure that if any of you were living in the unit, that is effected, that you would be unhappy with this development as well. whereas i understand that there is a need for housing, i think it has to be done very carefully

in san francisco. and i will say this, that if the commission approves this project over our objection, i would strongly urge the following conditions. number one, the project has improved. i didn't know that until this week. but the third story has been eliminated. that is a vast improvement. and we appreciate it. we appreciate the work that the city did and chris may did in that regard, but as a condition we would strongly advocate that under no circumstances is there to be any deck or additional structure added to the current roof of that property. we also recommend that more trees be planted on the alley and i will work with the other owner to do that to make it a little less invasion of privacy

for lupine. i am a little bit frustrated because unlike the hanover project that you heard, i originally wrote an e-mail back in december of 2016 in [bell ringing] -- knew our opposition, he heard nothing. >> president hillis: thank you, sir. -- until this past week. >> president hillis: thank you. >> so we have three minutes to -- >> president hillis: i have a question for you, is there any additional public comment on this item? seeing none, close public comment. commissioners?

. >> and had a chance to weigh in, but you've seen the plans, and you're familiar with this. and i think you get it. we're trying to add housing, and there's going to be an impact. no doubt if you live next to it, that's who's going to be impacted the most, but we're trying to add housing. so you seem okay with it.

you talked about the third floor, and i agree, that's an improvement. there are no roof decks. you would have to have permitted those. is there anything else about the design that troubles you at this point? >> the only trouble would be all of the windows that are facing against 4 lupine rgs , i'm not sure you can alleviate that, and i think the only thing you can do is require more trees in front of those windows to make it a more park like setting. what i'm concerned about, commissioner, is there's always a creeping factor. once the structure's built then perhaps they're going to add a deck or perhaps they're going to add a glass deck or something like that. >> president hillis: you can ask to be notified by the

department of any permit that happens on this site? >> yes, but i would urge that if this -- if the project goes forward that it be written into the project, noting our strong objections and noting that absolutely no further structure is to be added. >> president hillis: all right. >> -- to the row. and it's just a matter of planting trees and keeping all of us informed. >> president hillis: right. i appreciate it. thank you. >> thank you. >> president hillis: mr. green, do you have any response to that? >> first of all, this is a very unique situation. the opening existing by the fact that that path is a right-of-way, and as such, we were required to -- or the project sponsor was required to provide a set back equivalent to a front set back rather than a side yard set back. we, at this stage, would be

agreeable to adding conditions that would prohibit any -- any process by which the applicant would be entitled to pursue a building permit to add to the deck or to add to the roof a deck or something of that nature. we'd be prepared to accept that as a condition of approval. we have no issues with the landscaping. the issue of privacy, i think we would be willing to consider because obviously it impacts the adjoint -- it impacts the occupant of this unit, as well. those windows that are in rooms that are limited use, we would be prepared, i think, to put frosting, glaze those windows or frost it so that you're not looking in or out. we'd be willing to do those things. >> president hillis: all right. >> last thing i'd like to say about the size. we looked at other units in the area, and this unit is still smaller than those unit if you

don't add the garage. it is still larger in size to some of the condominium buildings that are next door, so that was one reason that was considered, but other than that, we are amenable to the accepted conditions that you talked about. >> president hillis: okay. greesh that. commissioner richards? >> commissioner richards: mr. lindsey, five units, that are already there, how does that work? >> david lindsey, planning department staff. they are entitled, through the conditional use process, to add a sixth unit to this project. >> commissioner richards: so i think we heard the project sponsor, representative of mr. green, and i think maybe he's the actual project sponsor, indicate that he would do landscaping, that he would do frosted windows, and we could put a special restriction on the property for no roof deck.

he's amenable to that. i see no reason not to approve this project, so i move to approve with those conditions. >> second. >> president hillis: commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: i'd like just to ask mr. lindsey, what is the proposed size of the building? >> i'm sorry, what is the -- >> commissioner moore: yeah, what is the square footage of the building. i could not find that. >> the proposed building. >> no, no, the existing. i could not find that. >> commissioners, it's 1796 square feet. >> commissioner moore: i'd like to get back to my original question, that that is something actually to ask mr. green. with -- this is 1700 square foot for a single-family home. that is a reasonably large building, and i can't help thinking that this particular building ties in more at the

ex-pension of others. replicating an irregular shape exacerbates the problems on all sides, and i would prefer a regularly sized building to accommodate the adjoining building. for a single-family home, this is a large home, when the adjacent neighbors live in smaller units, not only in the adjoining building, but in the apartment buildings next door. i have a problem with that, but there is a motion. >> commissioner richards: i did not hear the second. >> commissioner koppel. >> clerk: and just to be clear, commissioner richards, were there any conditions of approval. >> lish landscaping for -- additional landscaping for

privacy, and a condition for no roof deck. >> clerk: very good commissioners. there is a motion to approve this permit as amended with additional land skaepg with frosted glass and land gsh-additional amendments with frosts glass and landscaping, and no roof deck. on that motion -- [ roll call. ] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 6-0. commissioners, that'll place us on item 19 for case number 2016-005799. at 429 mason street. this is a conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon, commissioners. the project before you is a request for a conditional use authorization to convert the existing former spring valley

water company building for use as a hotel. the project is located in the c-3 g zoning district at 8130 height f and bulk. because the property is located within the kearny-baker-sutter conservation district, as part of the article 11, the project underwent review by preservation list and list issued a primary permit to alter because the project description is limit today interior description to convert the now former vacant office building to 77 tourist hotel rooms. restoration of the exterior terracotta cladding will be part of the project. all of the character defining details will be retained as part of the project, and the property has an easement which is held by san francisco

heritage, so they were largely involved with staff on the review of retention of lobby features that are protected under that interior designation. the proposal will include a lounge at the rooftop. this is an area that was previously used as a staff employee lounge when it was a water company building. the only exterior expansion of the building envelope will be for a stair penthouse, and that will serve as second means of egress for the roof terrace. the department found that the project was conforming for conditional use findings for hotel use. the market analysis was included as part of the commissioners' packets, and on balance, we find the project conforming with the general plan and planning code. this concludes my presentation, unless you have questions, and

the project team is here to present more detail about the project. >> president hillis: we may have questions, but let's first hear from the project team. welcome. you have five minutes. >> good afternoon, president hillis and commissioners. thank you for your time this afternoon. the president and founder, our team is excited to present the proposed project at 425 mason street, located in union square. the project was the home of the original spring valley water company building and was subsequently the home of the city of san francisco's water department until the early 2000's. until such time it has sat mostly vacant and in poor condition. at that time our team was made aware of the possibility of acquiring this building. it was easy for me to see the

opportunity to bring this building back to life, combine the historical elements with all the amenities that a hotel could offer. we did some research and we were able to find some old photos of the rooftop garden that are shown -- that are shown on the left. it was in a newspaper that we discovered, and we did interpretive comparison to what we thought it would look like today. based on that, we are designing the new terrace to be based on the original garden design, which you'll see here, so that kind of takes the evolution of the design into what we think it could look like today. we have received tremendous community support from the stakeholders with no opposition after our team's outreach.

we have and will continue to work with all agencies and neighbors going forward with the hopes of creating an exciting new hotel with much needed street level activation in an important and iconic part of the city. thank you for your time and consideration. i'll now turn it over to the stanton team. >> good afternoon, president hillis and commissioners. i'm the architect and i'm here to answer any questions that you may have about the layout. it's a proposal to convert the vacant building for you into a 77 room tourist hotel. the existing building is located a block west of union square on an active section of mason street adjacent to restaurants, bars, entertainment venues, and hotels. the building has been vacant

since 2007, and outside of minor repairs done by the previous owner, most of the interior partitions have been removed saved from the ground level. the historic photos show some of the exterior of the building. we're excited to be able to bring the garden feature back into the building. the lobby inside has remained relatively unchanged since the original design from willis polk, although like most of the building, it is in need of repair. we as a firm have been very fortunate to work with an owner who sees the potential for what this building can be, and who wants to celebrate the historic elements in this new integration. we want to celebrate the architectural elements in the

lobby and use them to reactivate the ground level for the new lobby space. by putting the hotel operations back of house and maintenance in the basement, we have plans for a restaurant lounge and bar. the guest rooms will have five guest rooms on the mezzanine and four rooms on a typical floor. the guest room windows along mason street will have a secondary window installed by the existing historic windows at the facade. we located a secondary egress stair toward the back of the building to minimize the visual impact of the penthouse on the top of the roof. the surrounding terrace will have new pafrs, planters and outdoor seating for public use. like previously mentioned, we've been working closely with

sf her age and the engineering department to make sure we seismically retrofit the building and bring it back up to code. in general our approach has been to preserve and rehabilitate the building whenever possible, so in addition to that, we will be opening up some of the dirk street so that the fill in -- would open up until windows there that have been previously in-filled. >> president hillis: if you can finish up within 30 seconds. >> there were some additional windows on derby street that we were planning to open up. in closing, thank you for your time as mentioned, and we hope that you approve this project. >> president hillis: great. thank you. any public comment?

>> good afternoon, president hillis, members of the planning commission. i'm the executive director of the union square improvement district, and a representative for the district came to our public affairs meeting in early november and spoke to us, and we were overwhelmingly supportive of this project. support it for a number of reasons. the building as mentioned earlier has been vacant for a long time, the early 2000's, so it's really great to see it have proposed use as a hotel. we are a vibrant hotel district, so we're always looking for new hotels. this is sort of our entertainment corridor in union square, so it would be great to attract it with visitors. this is gated off right now and is really an eye sore for our district. we can't get in there and clean it up, but if they're able to get in there and clean it up and have it be a public open

space, that's an added plus to our district. so we look forward to the project, we're in project, and we look forward to it contributing to the vibrancy of the district. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. i'm a labor researcher. i'm going to be reading a letter on behalf of cynthia gomez who's also a researcher who couldn't be here today because she's with our workers who are on strike at the bohemian club. this letter is in support of a proposed hotel project at 425 mason street. as a union representing hospitality employees, we are concerned with other new jobs created in this industry will serve to lift up the community by providing leading wages and working conditions for the hard working people who work in our city's hotels. hotel developers have historically supported the

creation of new jobs. these agreements represent a dub willing win for our community. they ensure that jobs created with good quality jobs, and they also guarantee that hotel developments are free from costly labor disputes. the developer of this project reached out to us early on in the entitlement process and worked with our union to sign such an agreement. they have also signed an agreement which covers the building trades, as well. the proposed project is located in an area rich with hotels and is located right next door to another proposed hotel project. this project -- we support this project for its guarantees of good quality jobs in this critical industry for san francisco. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. any additional public comment? seeing none, we'll close public comment. commissioner koppel?

>> yeah, thanks, mr. president. i do like the restoration plan for the lobby, for the roof, for the rooms. i think the building still is going to fit very well contextually within the neighborhood and its character, and along with the hotel workers that provide the permanent jobs at the hotel, the trades also, through their letters of support show that the temporary construction part is going to be done properly, also. and just to remind the other commissioners and the public, the hotels, they're not necessarily local developers, they're nationwide, so it's not very common that the developers are sensitive to our city's needs as this developer is today, so i would move to approve. >> commissioner richards: second. >> president hillis: commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: i'm happy to hear this building has found a new use and has found a new owner. these buildings are critical, particularly when they stand more than ten years. it becomes critical to save them, but we cannot grateful as

a heritage who held the preservation easement over the building, because they have significant influence in what can and can't happen. i think a european style we use is a perfect way of using the building. i'm really happy about the details and can't wait for it to capture the wave of where it is 100% successfully occupied in that location. >> clerk: seeing nothing further, commissioners, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve the matter with conditions. on that motion -- [ roll call. ] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 6-0. commissioners, that'll place us on item 20, a, b, and c. [agenda item read].

>> good afternoon, commissioners. elise tuffy with department staff. project before you is request for a downtown approval authorization with exceptions for height, bulk, and ground level wind currents for approval of a conditional use authorization for office use larger than 5,000 gross square feet in size on floors six and seven of the building, and for allocation of 49,999 square feet of office space under the annual office development limitation program. the project site is an irregularly shaped corner lot at the corner of stockton and o'farrell street in the southwest corner of union

square. the northeast corner of the lot extends east to security pacific place where there's 43 feet of frontage that serves as the loading area for the existing store, the macy's men's store. the project proposes to convert the existing single tenant retail building for multitenant use. this would be accomplished through interior alternatations, mechanical upgrades, and a one story vertical alteration with set backs. the existing lim stone cladding is proposed for removal in favor of a new sign that incorporates window glazing and new storefronts along the lengths of both stockton and o'farrell streets. for basements through floor five are proposed for multitenant retail use. floors six and seven are to be proposed for office use accessed through a lobby

located at the far east end of the o'farrell street elevation, and a new one story vertical location is proposed for retail restaurant use. in total retail is proposed for seven out of the nine proposed building levels, and would amount to 196,802 gross square feet. currently macy's men's store uses the sixth and seventh floors of the building as accessory office space. the project proposes to convert those same floors through the conditional use and office allocation program into regular office space. the change of use requested through the entitlements for the commission would not displace existing public serving retail uses on those floors. no off street parking is proposed; however, the existing offstreet loading area will be retained as part of the project. private open space for the building tenants will be provided at the roof level and closer to the street outside

the third floor, where the facade design incorporates a 6 foot recess in the exterior building envelope. the proposed project would require acquisition of approximately 4,000 units of transferrable development rights which is within the f.a.r. limits allowable under the planning code. on april 18, 2018, the historic preservation commission found the project to be on balance compatible with the historic features of the kearny market mason sutter conservation district and in conformance with the secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation. at that hearing, a major permit to alter was approved with the following conditions. as part of the site permit, some greater articulation of the second floor parapet will be reviewed for district capability and determination of the building base, storefront materials and details are to be reviewed by preservation staff as part of the permitting

process; and prior to the issuance of the building permit that the project sponsor must provide written certification that the necessary units of tdr have been acquired. environmental review was conducted for the project which was granted a class 32 categorical exemption from ceqa. in terms of public comment, in addition to the four letters of support in the commission packet, the department has received one phone call inquiring about the anticipated duration of construction for the project. the caller did not, however, express either support or opposition to the project. department recommends approval based on the points outlined in the commissioner's executive summary included in your packet, including the project would allow for multiple retailers to occupy the building, a more highly finestrated facade design will

allow more vision into the building and foster a more dynamic interaction between the building and the public realm. the location of office use on the sixth and seventh floors of the building is allowed as a conditional use and is allowed where office space has been in practice for many years. the request for exemptions under section 309 of the planning code will adversely block the sun light area and will not increase wind speeds at the ground level, and the project is on balance, consistent with the objectives and policies of the general plan and the planning code. this concludes my presentation unless you have questions. the project arc tehitect from ginsler are here to provide more detail through their presentation. thank you. >> president hillis: great. thank you. did you want to -- >> yes. hi.

lee hepner from commissioner peskin's office. i just wanted to add a little bit of context to this. i know this commission has held hearings on office space conversions in the downtown cp 3 district both in march of 2013 and february of this year. on this project, which our office is not taking a position on for or against, we did introduce interim zoning controls in fact with which we collaborated with planning department staff on and oewd, as well to sort of address the ongoing applications we are seeing for retail to office space conversion in fact downtown c 3 r. i actually brought copies of these interim zoning controls which i may want to review. to be clear, these have not been passed by the board. they will be heard as land use and transportation committee on may 7, so these are not yet effective, but the purpose in handing them out to you are to give a sense of what other

considerations our office and what other questions our office and planning staff have been asking what i understand are long overdue permitting controls concerning retail to office space conversion. so beginning on the bottom of page three and through the end of this document, you can see some of the questions that we've been raising and how we phrased them in terms of what would be nice to see from an applicant submitting an application for this type of conversion, and things like information we do not have. for instance, a very comprehensive commercial rent survey for what retail space is going for downtown, what office space is going for downtown. there's information that applicants have short of conducting that survey on their own, but perhaps if they own other like properties in the area or have a sense of what -- what rents are being commanded for, retail versus office space, we would like to know if the property is being held out for retail use and whether it's

feasible or not feasible for use of this space as a retail space. and then, lastly, there were a list of things, you know, we want to make sure that this does not detract from the internationally renowned retail environment downtown. planning can indicated to us that they're seeing applications come in that they're up to x thousand 999 square feet without a really frequent floor plan or any indication of how the floor is going to be divided or whether independent access is going to be required to the office space versus, you know, the more publicly facing retail uses. so these are the types of considerations that our office is undertaking right now, we are diligently pursuing permitting controls. i suggest if these interim zoning controls do pass at the board on may 7 and then subsequently at the full board, that this project may be

subject to these additional findings and have to come back for a conditional use if they have not received their building permits by the effective date of these interim zoning controls, so that's an fyi. i just otherwise want to declare for the public record that we are diligently pursuing permitting controls. we do not expect these interim zoning controls are going to be in effect very long, and with the help of planning department and oewd hope that we can get really good comprehensive controls around these conversions in place in the very near future. thank you. >> president hillis: all right. thank you. mr. everieet, the interim controls, they have been proposed to the land use and transportation committee, but not to the full board? >> we introduced a substitute version in april. they will go to committee on may 7 and then to the full board on may 15, probably not

until mid-june. >> president hillis: it would give more power to the policy makers. >> this body would have to make additional findings for a conditional use, and those are in the second further resolved clause on page four. >> president hillis: all right. thank you. >> thank you. >> president hillis: project sponsor? welcome. >> thank you.

>> so good afternoon. reuben, junius and rose, the project sponsor and representing the owner of the property. this is an existing department store building with a size of 31,000 square feet. it is the type of retail setup that really is becoming ex-tink because of the changes that are taking place in the retail industry. so with respect to this building, macy's is going to be moving out no later than next january . we've joked around a little bit on our team that this building today is certainly not the prettiest building in union square, but in all seriousness, the existing building is very much opposite of what we want to see in a retail district today in terms of ground floor transparency, pedestrian friendly active frontages and so forth. so physically, this building absolutely needs to transform from the introvert it is today to the extrovert. it needs to being ativate

approximately 360 feet of street frontage, and it needs to be able to draw attention to the upper floors so that the entier building can be successfully occupied. so this project is definitely first and foremost a retail project. we have about 200,000 square feet of retail proposed starting at the basement level through first, second, third, fourth and fifth floors and including the rooftop area. we are also asking for an office allocation; however at least than 20% of the building area, it is definitely more of a secondary piece to this project. offices proposed, like i said, on the sixth and seventh floors, and the change that we're asking is overall very minimal when you compare it to the overall existing conditions. historically until today, the sixth and seventh floors have been used as support floors and office space, and never been

accessible to the public. so all we're asking is to go from accessory office space to stand-alone office space. with the design created, we believe this building has the ability to become a destination that will support other building uses in union square. i definitely want to emphasize that this is a retail project in a retail district. it is also a project that is consistent with all of the current codes and regulations, and i think including the recent policy discussions that has been going on for sometime which in significant part has focused on third floor uses, not sixth and seventh floor uses in terms of retail. we do plan to start construction as soon as macy's moves out, and we hope that you

approve the project today, so i'll turn it over to ginsler, and they'll explain their design. >> clerk: sf gov, can we go to the computer. >> good afternoon, commissioners. -- >> president hillis: just pull that mic a little closer to you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. thank you for your time. my name is bob perry. i'm the design director for this project with gensler architecture. so this project is truly about retail in union square, and what a great opportunity to do such a project in our hometown, in our back yard, the city where we were founded. so we look at the existing building. it's a building that was built in a different era for a different use. it worked then, it doesn't work so well now. our goal is to turn this building inside out, so we want to move from a single tenant multilevel building to a mixed use multitenant building that

brings new focus to the district. and a big focus for us is how the architecture can support viable upper level retail. the retail landscaping is changing and evolving. this project is about supporting and planning for that, so much so that the experts at gensler hosted a sort of interdisciplinary panel six monthsing with folks from across the city and industry to gain more insight into how to plan for this project. being in union square, the design team spent a lot of time in the area. we sought out inspirational examples, we asked ourselves, how do they work. we found buildings that have well organized and scaled facades, buildings that have a relationship to the street and the sidewalk and consistently found buildings that are light in color through the use of terra cotta and consistent materials. what we saw, we found a

transitional attitude that defines upper floors and lower floors. in approximate an attempt to stitch this building back into the context specifically to its neighbors, we mapped the street height -- or excuse me, the storefront scale on stockton and open farre'farrell on our to identify the lower floors and the upper floors. what's more is we're a corner property, and so we lifted the corner to acknowledge that. we also acknowledge union square with a further sort of lift in articulation of the architecture. to inform the scale of that move, we looked at -- we looked to the historical blade signs as a subtle gesture for a conte contextual scale move. so this is what it means to turn this building inside out, a street level that's activated with retail, both on stockton-o'farrell. o'farrell is going to be transformed with the

architecture along the base here. and what's more that transitional floor is a visual cue to let folks now in the community that the retail is active. there's something to do and it supports that approach. as we move away, this is a view up stockton to see it in context. as we start to move closer, you start to get a sense for scale. we worked with arc to work out the details of the components of the storefront. in the storefront, you can see our use of terra cotta. we're building a storefront back to the use of this material. as you can see we've generated a texture and a digital pattern to be traditionally crafted, to be hand built and really create something beautiful for the district. and those storefronts are activated both on stockton and o'farrell with multiple tenants, and we're supporting the upper level retail through

ground floor presence with the upper floor retail tenants. this is a view of the new o'farrell street elevation, fully activated with retail again. the third floor is articulated across the length. again, with the idea of supporting that retail and upper level. the roof is seen as a great opportunity. on the left is what we have today. on the right we're proposing a whole new experience, a new destination for union square and the city. so i'm really excited to share our collective vision for this project. myself and my colleagues are here for any questions you may have. thank you. >> president hillis: all right. thank you. do you want to -- >> one more note is we actually have v.r. goggles with a rooftop experience. if you're ready to partake, we're ready to share. >> president hillis: thank you. we'll open this up for public comment. i don't have any speaker cards. miss flood, go ahead, and

anybody else who'd like to speak, please lineup on this side of the room. >> good afternoon again, commissioners. kara flood, executive director, union square bid here to speak in support of this project. they came to our committee, and super excited about the design. as you heard, the design right now is not particularly interesting. and the reason this is even an opportunity for them is because retail is shrinking. in union square, the stores are consolidating, everything is becoming smaller, much smaller floor plates, and they're still proposing to have exciting retail opportunities on five floors. that's really key. it's already office, you know, as i said on the sixth and seventh floor. so i don't think this is a major change. i think this'll really activate this area. this of course is where the subway, the new subway's going to open up onto. this is a really busy, business he street. we're really excited with it.

we are just highly sensitive to construction construction, so i would hope they're highly communica communicative about the construction. just real quick on the c 3 r, we are actually going to be quite engaged in the process to try to help you all and work with oewd and planning on what should the mix be, especially on the second and third floors. we've been asked to do a study now with oewd to figure out what exists on those two floors right now, what are the vacancy rates on those floors, what are the uses up there, because again, it's -- you know, rent drop off on the second floor. ground floor commands high rents but up on the second and above, way lower. so then office becomes much more attractive, and if those spaces aren't connected, it doesn't make sense necessarily to have a retail. there aren't department stores that are coming, they're shrinking. we look forward to working in

the process. we don't look for a moratorium that's going to stall these projects. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you, miss flood. next speaker, please. >> my name is stan cohn from bridge real estate advisors, but really on behalf of neiman marcus. i've been a long time advisor of neimans, and we were very concerned about what was going to take shape next door. ultimately it went to the board, and we submitted a letter of support, and we continue to support the project. it happens that as an advisor, i've worked with the city on various things, including the palace of fine arts, but directly across the street where crate and bare el rel wa located. that store far exceeded what

the department store was doing. also represent a number of buildings on o'farrell and stockton our family owned 240 stockton street, where gucci is, where bali used to be. i'm a fifth generation san franciscan and very committed to seeing that the landscape is preserved and in this case, improved. >> president hillis: thank you, mr. cohn. next speaker, please, miss hester. there it is. >> sue