heritage of italian americans for future generations. we approached this mission by doing the following. first, by curating and exhibiting celebrated art exhibitions, normally, three to four each year. we also, from time to time, will curate significant historical exhibitions on topics of italian american history, particularly here in the san francisco bay area. we have year-round italian language and literature courses. we have lectures and film programs throughout the year, and we have a child outreach program, we call ciao, children's italian american outreach where our programs are held in public schools throughout the city.

the 940 battery street building was generously donated to the museo by jerome kokutsa, a long time patron. this will allow for significant expansion of the gallery space and museo programs and more importantly will introduce an income producing element for the museo so that it becomes a formality off endowment to the museum. the museo is very excited to collaborate with these parties.

the proposal before you is based on the design by architect or architects cabanero and associates. in bringing this proposal to reality, we believe will result in a significant asset for the northeast waterfront district, an area, which you may know, has a decidedly italian and italian american history. thank you. >> president wolfram: thank you. >> thank you. i will be brief. maybe not as brief as one minute and 12 seconds. >> president wolfram: you can have more time. >> can i have the overhead again, please. so you can see the location of the museo. it's on battery between vallejo and green. here it is working from tele -- looking from telegraph hill. it somewhat disappears in the overall cityscape there.

it's not a very prominent building. here, you can see the facade. to our right is 900 battery street. in the center of 940 battery street. both of these are long, vacant structures, for at least 20 years is my understanding, and the museo will reactivate the building. the building, i would argue, is is an overly distinguished but a supportive structure in the district. i don't mean that as a criticism, i just think in and of itself, it's probably not a landmark, but it's part of the district. we do share -- i think it's important to note, we share internal property line wall with the adjacent property. we are -- our structural system basically comes up to that wall

and reinforces that wall but does not go into that wall significantly. this is a section of the existing building. as you can see -- or can't see because of the words, it's a basement and three-story structure. the first and second story are fairly standard, the second floor height and third floor height are both 17'4", so they're very high. that gives us an opportunity. this is the proposed section. as you can see, we are keeping the first floor basement and second floor plate, keeping much of the heavy timber columns in those areas. then sliding down, essentially, putting a new third floor in, inserting a fourth floor, adding a light steel frame on top of the building. and you can see in blue what we're keeping, the exterior

facade, the two basement -- or basement and first-fluorstory. here's the existing facade. here's the proposed facade. in elevation, unfortunately, it appears that the penthouse is very prominent. it's much less prominent than it appears, so you look on the streetscape, it virtually disappears, you can barely see it from the intersections down the street. you can't see it from across the street. just real quickly, you can see very generous lobby, retail interest that will bring pedestrian interest from the street with the display area in the back, in the basement, and on the second floor, with vertical circulation and a light well that brings light down into the basement to connect those three floors. the third, fourth, and fifth

floors will be income producing property for the museum. here we are on the ground floor, showing the renovated existing windows, now windows on the second floor to replicate the old ones, and a bronze canopy to welcome you into the building. and that's it. happy to answer any questions if you have them. >> president wolfram: commissioners, do you have any questions. all right. at this time, we'll take public comment if anyone wishes to speak. >> i actually have public comment. my name is steve oliver, and i started a fund many years ago -- and i finished the -- [inaudible] >> -- and was concerned about what was happening in parallel was a collapse of major arts organizations south of market in san francisco every month

during the dot-com boom. [inaudible] >> -- and that was to create a company -- an organization called cast, community art stablization trust, which i chair. they were able to find a $5 million grant to kick this off. we've raised another $30 million, and our goal is to protect the arts from the tech explosion without any negative impact to the tech community but to give certified financial strength to the arts world. i ran into 940 battery long before i moved to the neighborhood, but i realized how much this would change the culture of the neighborhood given just that positive jean lightenment of the streets, and

it would be inrvigorated by this. thank you. >> president wolfram: thank you. is there any other member of the public that wishes to speak on this item? seeing none -- we do have. >> my name is harvey hacker. i'd like to ask a question before i begin my comments. the owner of the adjacent building, michael buss, is here, and he has somewhat more extended remarks to give, so may i make a short presentation, and then, he can speak for, you know, a little bit longer? >> president wolfram: how much longer do you think he needs? >> three minutes for me, ten for him? >> president wolfram: ten is a little long to this item. is he speaking just to this particular project, the 930

battery? we could give him five minutes, but -- >> i'll be as brief as possible. >> president wolfram: okay. >> first, i want to apologize because what we're asking for is a continuance and it's because i've just learned about the project and got involved too late to do the adequate preparation, but i want to tell you about the issues which i think are significant enough to warrant a continuation. >> president wolfram: no, the overhead is on the other side. >> ah. this -- what this illustrates is that the building was built at one continuous structure comprising 900 and 940 battery

street in 1914. its division in two structures is on paper. they share an impact wall among other considerations. our first point that is more germane to the preservation commission is that the proposed changes to the facade really should be looked at not in terms of the narrow slice that is cal is. >> caller: ed -- called 940 battery street, but the building which takes up the whole block. we are concerned and believe there is a viable design for the museum that makes much more modest changes to the existing pattern of openings that would continue, and we would like the opportunity to discuss those with the project sponsor. the second thing is we are

concerns, and we have an engineer who has begun an analysis with the effect on the existing building, the larger part at 900 battery of the seismic reinforcement proposed of the museo section, and that's all i have to say. and i'm earnestly requesting a continuation. >> president wolfram: thank you. next speaker, please, mr. busk. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is michael busk. i am one of the trustees of the 900 battery street, l.l.c. i've worked at 900 battery for the past 60 years. before an historical resource

evaluation and today's presentation by the project's representatives is that it misses the mark by considering only 25% of the building. try and see if i can skip. if you include -- you look in front of your papers, look at the building complete, the single building is 183 feet of facade taking up close to two thirds of the block. the ground floor alteration to a stand-alone 21,000 square foot building wouldn't be a whole lot of cause for alarm. but in the northwestern waterfront landmark district for a spectacular 183 foot facade of classic warehouse frontage along battery street, these changes make an immense difference. if you look at a photograph on

the front, for example, the 940 -- the 940 door, it's not a garage door, but a dock door, was intentionally create today be symmetrical with the dog doors with the rest of the building. note the match between the 940 dock door and the 900 dock door to the right. the proposal to more than double the width of the 940 dock door to 23 feet and increase its height 3.5 feet to a total of 12.5 renders is out of proportion with the dock door to the right and the rest of the 183 foot facade. and this proposed demolition of the entryway is not something that can be reversed. the proposal also seeks to eliminate two 48 by 68 inch original sidewalk level window openings. but again, notice the symmetry between those two windows, the windows up above, and then look to the right to the 900 battery

street building which continues that second floor line of windows, so it goes all the way from the whole 183 feet from one end of the building to the other end of the building. illuminating these elements would destroy the integration of this 52-foot portion with the rest of the 183-foot facade of this one building. with the above classification in mind, i would like to consider the interior of the 940 portion of the warehouse. this project should be guided been a overarching goal, to preserve the warehouse character of this historic resource in the north waterfront landmark district. on the ground floor, preserve the current dark -- dock door opening to the building. fabricate a substantial wooden door so it would integrate with the other dock doors in the

area, but not attempt to replicate them. should the current do remember docks exist, however, they should be reatached to the building. given mr. kokuzza's love of the building, i would be surprised if he allowed these doors to discarded. then place the pivot glass doors 12 feet inside the original dock door to the warehouse. retain the 30 wooden columns that for over a century have been the defining characteristic of this historic 900-940 building. then when a person walks into the museum, they will encounter the impressive sight of 13 14-inch square 30 foot columns rising in front of them. rehabilitate and restore the existing ground floor window in its original opening just to the north of the dock entryway.

rehabilitate and restore the second existing ground floor window through its north. if doing so is not possible because of code requirements then put in a 48-inch door at whatever height is appropriate. may i continue? >> president wolfram: you get 30 more seconds. >> i'm sorry? >> president wolfram: 30 more seconds. >> i'm sorry. i've prepared for the ten minutes, and i can't think of how to cut it. this is a 93,000 square foot building. it should get some attention more than an additional 30 seconds. the columns are removed on every floor or -- >> president wolfram: thank you very much. >> thank you. >> president wolfram: does any other member of the public wish to speak on this item? if so, please come forward. seeing and hearing none -- mr. bueller, would you like to speak? >> good afternoon, commissioners. mike bueller on behalf of san

francisco heritage. san francisco heritage has not taken a formal position on this project. we have not reviewed it. i just did want to note that in recent days i've heard from several members of the community including some members of my own board expressing concerns about the proposed alterations to the building and impact on the surrounding district. certainly, we are supportive of the proposed use and the proposed project, and i have great respect for cast and mr. oliver and the goals of this project. but should a continuance be granted today, we would certainly welcome the opportunity to have the project team present to our projects and policy committee so we can take a formal position on the project. thank you. >> president wolfram: thank you. does any other member of the public wish to speak? >> i'm patricia busk, and i want to continue what my husband had started. in the 940 proposal, the

distinguishing expanding massive wood columns on the main floor is destroyed by wooden columns either being removed as are ten of them or a wall placed to camouflage them, rehabilitate and restore the existing ground floor windows in the original openings just to the north of the dock entryway. rehabilitate and restore existing second ground floor window just north of the first window. if doing so is not -- [inaudible] >> -- and to whatever height the sidewalk is appropriate. in the basement, the proposed changes to the basement have had the result that when a person goes down stairs, they again experience empty, unsupported space but not a reimaging of the 1917 warehouse as a museum space. in the proposal, nine of the 30

wooden columns have been removed, eight more are hidden inside storage rooms, and ten are crunched against walls and at least three survivors offer no expansive wooden columns, just three lonely leftovers. i ask this be modified to retain in the basement the current 30 15 square wood columns that rise 9'8" from the concrete floor to support the joists of the ground floor. on the second floor, if this proposed to decolumn the 940 space is accepted, then, the person walks up to the second floor, they will experience none of the historic warehouse defining wood columns. in the proposed 30-11 foot -- inches square 12 foot tall wooden columns almost twice my height -- or that's my husband's height, excuse me, are no longer history.

unpreserved, gone, abandoned, after a century of service. retain these 30 dramatic wooden columns on the second floor and with them the historic character of the ware of house. the new -- warehouse. the top flee floors themselves provide 13,000 square feet of new open space, and they should offer more than enough of -- for special events. in summary, the 940 proposal should celebrate rather than ignore building's impressive creation in 1917 as a waterfront warehouse. i cannot understand how an organization so committed to history can destroy the history of this building in order to create a museum of history. the space already is a museum of history of san francisco. thank you. >> president wolfram: thank you. does any other member of the public wish to speak on this item? seeing and hearing none, we'll

close public comment. commissioners? commissioner pearlman? >> commissioner pearlman: thank you. thank you for the presentations and the people who spoke about the building. i -- i wholeheartedly endorse this project. i think that despite the comments of the last two speakers, i don't think we should treat every single stick of wood and every single fragment of stucco as something precious. i think, you know, we have to bring buildings into the current times, and to me, this is an extremely modest change, with all the windows basically staying the same except the ground floor entrance. well, you can laugh, but this is just -- this is my opinion. i -- i -- you know, you characterize this as such as -- you know, an important building, and while it may be in its form, in and of itself,

it's a very plain rather background type of building as warehouses typically were. there are many warehouses that are quite dramatic, and they have beautiful architectural detailing, classical detailing. this is quite flat and plain, and you know, of its time, 1917, you know, i would have expected it maybe to have a lo

paper -- you know, paper building, the process. it's kind of surprising -- surprised a -- the neighboring

owner comes in and has these -- these issues, not that i necessarily agree with them all, but i'm interested in how this probable cause has come about. >> let me just go through the notification process. >> sure. tim frye, planning department staff. the process was notified through article 10 through a mailed and posted notice. i believe we have not heard any time regarding the -- any comments from the general public or surrounding community, but miss salgado may have more information about any correspondence that we received after the posting. >> commissioner johnck: all right. >> so as i said in my introduction to the project, we didn't receive any comments on the project, however on july 20, i was contacted by mr. hacker. he sent me a voice mail, an e-mail, skm asked for a -- and

asked for a staff analysis of the project at that time, and it was before the packet had come out, so i gave him the preservation analysis from the pmnd which had already become public and also shared the plans with him at that time and offered to put him in contact with the project sponsor, if he wished. so i did have that contact with him. i didn't receive any comments, opinions on the projects, but i do know at that time, i was contacted by him. >> president wolfram: can you remind the commission what the noting time frames are? >> it's a 20 day notice, and there was also a poster installed on the site, and i received confirmation that that poster was installed on the required date. >> president wolfram: and was there a required preapplication notice on that? would you let us know what other outreach you might have done 12 done?

>> there was a preapplication meeting. mr. busk was there. we chatted with him a little bit. didn't hear any particular concerns. since that time, the scope of the project has been reduced to basically modest in the planning code. the notice was posted june 17, so it's been up from there. last week i heard from mr. hacker, whom i've known for many years, for structural drawings early on. sent them to him, e-mailed him a couple of times, asking if he had any concerns. i found out about the request for continuance five minutes before this hearing. >> president wolfram: thank you. commissioner black? >> commissioner black: want to have a question about the proposed uses on the upper floors. one of them looks like a vent, and the top floor's -- >> it's flexible.

we believe that it's going to be office uses that support financially the museo. it is possible and we wanted to make sure we go through the building code process that we make sure we have an event space there if in fact the way it turns out, so the idea is event space, assembly requires much more vigorous exiting, and so that's why we're proposing that. >> commissioner black: thank you. something i want to say, i want to say to the adjacent property owners, i appreciate your love of your building and your interest in -- your strong interest in wanting to see what happens next door. we often don't have that. we have people who want change in their building, and they don't -- they don't necessarily appreciate renovation efforts, so i do appreciate that.

i am quite excited about the concept of this museum. that's the reason i was asking about the event space because i think it will revitalize this part of the street, and i think that's always good for the city. i like the fact that the financial system that's led to it today, and it will be supported financially. that's a good thing, so i do like the moddium. looking at this illustration, the one that was provided for us today, there is already this continuity between the two parts of this building, so it's not a pristine regular pattern all the way across on all of the floors. so i don't see the necessity to require everything to match all

the way across the building. it certainly doesn't on the neighbor's building, and it currently doesn't on the applicant's building. so i am inclined to think that the enlarged entrance is not out of line with the existing discontinuity pattern across the window -- i mean, the buildings. i do appreciate some of the finsetration changes that -- finestration changes that will bring the windows into good shape. that's a good thing. in general, i'm very much in support of the museum being located here. >> president wolfram: thank you, commissioner black. commissioner pearlman? >> commissioner pearlman: yeah, i forgot to say one thing. i worked with a group of nonprofit film organizations here in san francisco, and it was a south of market warehouse

building, and my understanding was they ended up purchasing the building years ahead because of the income and the way the organization supported it. so i especialmean, to me, the f what mr. oliver's organization is doing is also so supportive of the city. and again, that may be more of a planning commissioner type of comment, but i think relative to this project, i think that's very significant because of, you know, all the concerns now of the arts organizations fleeing the city because there's no way to support the arts, and here, we have this incredible opportunity with no need for the city to jump in and try to save something but as a way that the community has come forward to support it. so i think that's absolutely significant for this, as well. >> president wolfram: thank you. commissioner johns? >> commissioner johns: thank you. many years ago, that is in the

mid1980's, i had an office around the corner at 680 green street, and i have been familiar with the neighborhood since that time. these buildings, one of the things about the proposal which i found attractive was the -- was the -- the mention of commercial space. one of the problems with this neighborhood has always been that it was dead. it was actually quite difficult in some instances to get people to work in my office because they couldn't do anything at lunch, they couldn't go buy a shirt or a tea cup. it was just dead, and i think that this would -- that would be a very nice addition. i share your comments, and yours, about the -- the way this proposed use would fit

into the neighborhood, sooty he concur in supporting it. >> president wolfram: thank you. i'd point out one item here that might be helpful for members of the public. we were reviewing this project in relationship to the character of the landmark district that it's found in, so this is not an individual landmark billion, this is a contribute -- building, this is a contributing building to the entire district, so it is compatible with the overall landmark district. even in the context if one was to look at it as an -- one of the other commissioners noted, in the context of both of these buildings together, this still i think is a compatible change. and the other thing i think is exciting about this project is this is an empty building on a block that is largely empty.

900 battery has been empty for many, many years, and for the sake of historic preservation, having buildings be tenanted supports the city. commissioner johnck? >> commissioner johnck: i'd like to echo that view. the other, definitely, the historic waterfront, i'm very keen on that. but the historic design, this district is linked to the history of art and design there, and i think the energy and the design features of this are absolutely fantastic to marry into that other historic aspect of the district, so -- yeah. >> president wolfram: so is there a motion? >> i'd like to make a motion to approve with the conditions. >> second. >> clerk: seeing nothing further, commissioners, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this matter with conditions.

on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously, 6-0. commissioners that'll place us on items 11-a and b for case numbers 2018-008087 l.b.r., and 2018-008754 l.b.r. at 320. >> commissioner hayes-white: street a -- 320 hayes street. >> i'll be presenting two cases for you today. the first is hayes street grill. this is a 39-year-old restaurant located in hayes valley at the edge of the civic center landmark district. the current owners opened the business and a former photo shop at 324 hayes street with two other partners in 1979.

while -- [inaudible] >> -- personal attention to its customers. the business also survived the 1989 loma prieta earthquake and remained open while many nearby buildings were closed for seismic retrofitting. in addition to donating thousands of meals to local nonprofits and hosting many -- excuse me -- fund raising events, hayes street grill with zuni cafe with chez panizze hosted the first aids benefit in the united states. the restaurant and business is associated with significant persons including patricia, who

became the first permanent restaurant critic for the san francisco chronicle in the same year that she opened the grill. the building itself is listed as a category eight building. the building is -- actually both buildings are contributors to the hayes valley commercial historic district, and staff is very supportive of the application. we are recommending the following features and traditions be preserved and safeguarded. those are the original palm logos stenciled on the exterior, the walls lines with photographs of performing artists and artistic directors, the interior decorated with wainscoting, the lunch and

dinner menus composed on a daily basis based on the availability of the local fish purchase var and farms. i'll move onto the second applicant which is balboa cafe strunt and bar. the bar opened in 1913 despite the signage above the door, which says 1914. the owner was super stitious and did not like the number 13. it was originally a working man's saloon. it has become a more sophisticated establishment over the years but the historic integrity of the building is intact. many original details remain including the back bar, exterior signage, including an

off sales liquor sign, original coca-cola sign, and small architectural details throughout the interior. there's little information about the original balboa cafe owners from its opening through the early 1970's, but at that time, jack hobda took over the operations of the building. and then, in 1994, the plumchak group obtained the balboa. the business is associated with several significant historical folks, many still living, including gavin newsom, our current lieutenant governor of california. he is also a former two time mayor of san francisco as you know, and former district two supervisor. the property is also associated

with pat kelly, who was the first female stockbroker in san francisco. it's also been the gathering place for many historical figures and celebrities, including gordon getty. it's also associated with jeremiah tower, who was an original chef at the cafe. staff is also very supportive of this application and is recommending the following features and traditions being preserved, including the exterior signage, the off sail liquor sign, the coca-cola sign. the oak back bar dating from 1913, the tile floor, the windows and transoms, the original side doors and brass

fittings. we're also recommending that the signature balboa burger be retained on the menu, that the affordable wine list be retained, and the historic original photos inside the cafe be retained. if you have any questions, i'm happy to answer, and the original business owners are here. thank you very much could fe. >> president wolfram: thank you. would the owners wish to say anything? we would love to hear from you, but you're not required. seeing and hearing nothing, we'll close public comment. commissioner? >> i have a question for shelley. because it's categorized as category a, can we set this up to follow for benefits that are available to hayes street,

landmark, mills act? >> that's a great question. currently, the district is found to be eligible but to my knowledge, it's not listed on the california register, so it would not be eligible for the mills act unless the district were to become listed. but we could talk to the property owner about further designations for the property. >> that would be great if she's willing. >> president wolfram: oh, thank you. commissioner pearlman? >> commissioner pearlman: thank you. i'm excited about this, as well. i lived on hayes street before the freeway came down, and just about two blocks up from where hayes street grill is, and i have been there many, many times over the years. so i think this is -- both of them are great legacy businesses. i do think it's funny that we're going to have a burger as

a historic resource. i think it's kind of a funny thing, so you can never change your menu, ever again, so i think this is exciting. it's very much a part of the spirit of the

commissioners. there has been a motion that has been seconded for a motion for approval. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 6-0. >> congratulations. >> congratulations. well deserved. >> clerk: commissioners, that'll place us on item 12, for the potrero station mixed use project. this is an informational project. >> good afternoon, commissioners. john lowell will be speaking first about the project

followed by a ten minute informational presentation by the project sponsors. >> great. thank you. mr. lowell? >> thanks, commissioners, and good afternoon. i'm john lowell, director of workforce project and economic development. i'm here to answer questions after i go through the informational presentation. so i'm very pleased to be here before you talking about this project. it involves an extraordinary site, one that i think several of you have had the chance to visit. i encourage the rest of you to do so and also encourage the public to do so. the project sponsor schedules regularly, as i understand it, opportunities to tour the site, so one should take an advantage of that. so it's an incredible site with

a -- located in an extraordinary unique and fascinating history, i should say, located in a fewly phenomenal waterfront setting, and i think you'll -- truly phenomenal waterfront setting. i think you'll agree it's extremely rare in san francisco that we have a chance to talk about a site like this as rebirth of a site like this. equally impressive we think is the program for the proposed project and the richness of the public benefits package that we are in the process of negotiating with the sponsors for this effort. and you'll hear more about each of these points as we get into the presentation today. so when i talk about this project, the word that comes most to mind is transformation, of a place that was most recently known as a dirty power plant, a place that has been

seen as a negative presence on the local community there, and a place that neighborhood and city leaders worked for many years actually to shutter. so with that project, we will transform that negative association into a new, vibrant destination that will for the first time connect the neighborhoods of the central waterfront to this part of the bayshore line. so just two quick context setting points i wanted to highlight for you beforehanding it off to the team. if i could switch to the overhead -- there we go. the first being the settlement agreement, which the city and then the landowner entered into a legal agreement in 2009 to close the plant. it was greed to shutter the facility as soon as it was deemed not needed for

electrical reliability purposes by the independent system operator. that determination was made soon after, and the plant ceased general public operations at the end of 2010. also in the agreement -- excuse me. also in the agreement, the city agreed to work with the landowners on the development of a rescheme for the site, i'm sorry and treat it as a priority project in so doing, so that's one of the reasons we're here today. the second point is an item that -- something we refer to as the southern bay front strategy, which is really an organizing tool for us to talk about and coordinate what's really a suite of projects along the city's southeast

waterfront. here are those projects. as you can see, several of them have already been approved, including mission rock, pier 70, and the warriors. others in various states of approval, including india basin to the south of this project. so together, this set of projects represents a significant amount of housing, jobs and open space, so we'll obviously help shape the look and feel of the city for years to come. and they will also contribute mightily to a number of important elements of community fabric through the public benefits agreements that we negotiate with each sponsor of each of these projects. so items from sea level rise to improvements to the transportation system, and this is not news to anyone in this room, but we are in a housing crisis, a crisis of both availability and affordability,

and mayor breed has 'emphasize, again, to all departments, that this is of the utmost priority and that everything we do must be done through a lens of how is this helping address the housing crisis? so we're happy to report that this project as proposed, it does perform quite well in that regard. the program includes over 2,000 units of housing and something that we'll be close to a 33% below market rate level of affordability. so we'll get into these details at a few time, and both ken and i are here to answer questions. >> president wolfram: thank you, mr. lowell. >> commissioners, president wolfram, i was wondering if we could have 15 minutes for this item, just given the complexity

of the site. >> president wolfram: sure, 15 minutes of fine. >> thank you. commissioners, i'm enrique landa. today, i'm here it's the project sponsor for the potrero power station. potrero power station is a 28 acre site along the central bay front of just below pier 70. the site is highlighted in red for you to see. site is form -- was formerly part of potrero point, a large area of serpentine rock that went into the bay. because of its remote location it became an early site for early san francisco industrialization. certain industries moved out there quickly after the gold rush. gun powder production moved out

there soon after the gold rush in 1850. this photo was taken sometime in the early 1900's. this is from the south, looking up where the m.t.a. yard is in dogpatch, and you can see while there's very little developed around it, our site was very heavily used, and it had early uses such as power station production, and then also sugar refining. this is a site just before the war. the reason we show this slide is because you can see many places in dogpatch and potrero were still open vacant land, not an ounce of the power station was opened, and it was also an incredibly dense and tall site. 2016 through the -- excuse me, 2011, through the work of many here and also members of the public, the power station was closed and ceased to be a power station. we now get our power from the east bay and it comes in from a cable underneath the bay and is distributed close to our site.

that allowed an opportunity for the property to be sold and our company bought it in 2016. the first thing we did was take seriously the redevelopment of that site, and started to move towards remediation of the site. we held a rebust community meeting with over eight community meetings, 70-plus tour site. we host office hours, have stakeholder meetings and we've really tried to hear from the public because many of the public haven't been there despite the site being there for over 150 years. one of the things we heard was the site needed to produce housing. the other thing wz heard was to open up the waterfront, and the third thing was to have a variety of urban form, that they didn't want it all to be the same shape. project overview, we wanted to connect in every way, shape and form to the property thasts

behind us. -- that was behind us, so which connected to the property behind us. the resulting project that you see here has a mix of uses and forms that is 60% housing across the site, along with commercial, life science, a hotel, retail, community facilities, parks and open space. roughly six -- excuse me, six acres of the site are open space, about 22%. the uses here summarized. projects as mr. lowell mentioned has a distinct set of community benefits that come with it. chief amongst is 2600 units of housing. as i mentioned there's also 1100 lynn i don't remember feet of parks. we -- linear feet of parks. over $300 million in infrastructure and remediation will be spent on the site as well as new p.d.r. and of course preservation of the stack.

the site's complicated, and many of you who have toured it have seen it's got a rich industrial history, some of of which is present, but many of it's gone. today, the majority of the structures that remain, although there are many of them, few of them are of any significance. the majority of these buildings that remain are sheds, stacks, some pump houses, sheds, buildings that have little architectural or historical value. the three buildings that do have value are three district contributors that exist. the top is unit three, which is the power station built in 1965 that ran and fuelled most of san francisco kaerz power to 2011. below -- san francisco's power to 2011. below is the stack, or the chim knee, and the stack building.

-- chimney, and the stack building. this is the station a complex that existed, and the station a complex, i think my colleague jim will lead you through the balance of the presentation, and then, i'd be happy to take your questions, thanks so much. >> hi, commission. good afternoon, president wolfram. i do want to say just as an drukt opening remark, i think the most important -- we want to make sure we flag that for you. you know, the -- there's a number of reasons why the project is proposing to do so. most importantly, these

buildings have been in the -- unused for about 40 years and they're in a state of severe disarray and decay. the roofs were removed from the buildings and they're substantially degraded. i think there's some dispute about the availability of station a as an age resource. i think -- as a significant resource. but the building has lost its integrity because half of it had been demolished. i'll show you images of the buildings as we go through. this is station a, this is a building that is a very long brick building, half of which was demolished quite sometime ago, so you can see what's left is a long wall that i think is quite architecturally interesting, and a lot of people i think look at it and think it's interesting, but it's actually an interior wall of the former building that was there. so we have an image of station

a as it was built, and you can see pretty clearly that the building as it is now and as it is are quite significantly different. here's an image that lays the two on top of each other. this building, what it looked like in 1929, it was full of power generation equipment. that has been removed and the building's roof was removed in 20000 by pg&e. it's -- 2000 by pg&e. it's water damaged and in disarray. there's an operations room. you can see the pictures from the 20's as compared to now. the building has had no roof for 35 years and is destroyed. there is -- there are some significant issues with the bricks. there -- the building is bulging in certain instances and there's some concern about structural integrity, and just

the general state of the bricks. the compressor house is a single story brick buildings that is behind station a. the meter house, you can see here is a single story building, integrated meter house is also significantly compromised. the compressor house is adjacent to the meter house. the gate house is a component of station a. it's a small building adjacent to station a that used to be a gate to that larger station a complex that i showed you on a prior slide. the project is focusing on rehabilitation and preservation of the stack. it's a landmark of the community. it's when people visit the site, they gravitate towards. it's a 300 foot tall structure. it is also in need of seismic

rehabilitation. the sponsor has proposed to rehabilitate it and proposing to have a small cafe in the bottom of it, perhaps, but as you can imagine, for a building of this size, a small cafe is just a portion of the cost it will take to rehabilitate this. here's the roof of the stack. you can see it has an open flue. it was used for power generation. here's an image of the stack plaza as we proposed it. it will be a public plaza sort of central gathering place for the project. it'll be a place for public gathering, be able to have outdoor movies. it's -- it is directly on the waterfront, so it will remain a waterfront a waterfront icon. here are some plans that we

proposed to reuse the stack. one is using the base of the stack as a cafe. we're studying this through our e.i.r. and clearing it through ceqa. here's an image of the property from the water and then the stack and the building next to it is a unit three power block. the project is proposing to either rehabilitate the unit three power block as a hotel or if not, demolish it. for those of you that have toured the site, i think you have been up to the top of it. the views are exceptional. i think it's an exceptionally and interestingly character defining piece of building, and i think most people who visit the site are taken by it. so this structure was built in 1965. it has been deemed a contributor to the third street historidi