tv [untitled] October 21, 2011 10:30pm-11:00pm PDT
strongly about it. i am happy to support a motion that would remove the fins. i support commissioner moore's comments about the location of the bedrooms and living space. it seems to me, based on my observations of the architects' reaction, that they are happy to make those types of changes. also, i feel a little bit of regret about the loss of views and sympathize with the neighbors, but this is within the guidelines of the code for van ness and that site, so i do not think they are doing anything that is not, basically, promoted or suggested in that area.
i think it is a little bit -- also, the 15 foot issue. this project came in after those discussions became common. i would not necessarily hold the developer to that. as to how we do this in the future, i think we may see some changes in the code in general that would promote that floor to ceiling 15 ft. height on the ground-floor retail spaces. i think we might be seeing more of a trend going in that direction. but i think this project is very much along the lines of what we are moving toward, in terms of transit-oriented development. i am glad to see additional units, and also that the below market rate unit will be equitable to other types of units, so that something that should be done here.
the below market units on site, sometimes it seems to me there are issues around hoa fees and other things that are challenging to some people who live in these. the hoa fee is regulated, obviously, on the state level, not anything we can do locally. i support the project. commissioner moore: i would like the architect to come to the podium one more time. i have a couple of questions. could you talk -- i apologize that i did not properly pay attention. could you talk about materials one more time, please? >> sure. the materials of the building are glass windows, which are
roughly 35% to 40%. the balance of the building that is up against the street line consists of white boxes and vertical darker elements, the zinc. those are both metal panels. they will be installed in a unit system. the inset plan is pushed back. the airplane would be plaster. -- the rear plane would be plaster, lighter colored plaster. there is not a lot of the reset surface. as you look along the side, you will see more of that. commissioner moore: thanks for explaining that. i have to be very honest. a south and west facing building on van ness, which is not exactly the place of metal-clad buildings, including residential
-- i am a little concerned about the materials. you have low buildings around you. you have the church on one side. moving up the hill, you have buildings that are traditional and residential in materials. i do think a more residential resembling material would be something i would be interested in, partially because in strong southwest exposure you do not get enough definition on the metal. a break in the stucco has its own texture for dealing with light in not as harsh a way as metal does. i am really concerned also because the corridor has high car traffic.
you will have a lot of streaking. you are not going to do a can of metal. i know you have perfect veto. the you have a lot of possible pollution on a metal panel, when you have cars in large quantities. so i am concerned that building, while it might look crisp in the way you are drawing it, is perhaps not the right choice of material in that particular location, particularly when it comes to the van ness and clay street side. i do not have an opinion on what material it should be, but i would like more thought on that. there could be a sensitive, textured approach to a very contemporary facades. it deals with softness and residential exposures in a very contemporary and well-designed
building. president olague: i have heard a lot of differing opinions on that. i am happy with these materials. maybe stuff for comment. >> a lot of the discussion i am hearing from the commission is stuff that staff had concerns with. in producing these renderings for the commission today, staff had asked if the high contrast of the materials and the zinc panels -- i can pass this up to the commission, regarding the zinc. the combination of these and and the stucco, and what we are not he -- seeing here are where the scenes will occur. that will be in combination with some of the metal panels. i think the metal panels will be a little bit more of an accent to the actual background of the zinc and the stucco, which is a
softer, more presidential material. we did have concerns at the staff level when the design came through, and are continuing to work on that and build it into the application. president olague: would you like to continue? commissioner moore: seeing what i see here, i know quite a few of the buildings myself. i know the architect who designed them. these are not residential buildings. i personally believe this building is too flat and does not quite have the right texture for me in this location. there might be other places in rincon hill where you can pull that off, because you are among other contemporary buildings and not along a major car corridor. president olague: we do not have a motion yet. commissioner moore: it is
difficult to have this discussion in this room. it is almost impossible. because the building is so large, i would like the residential expression to be a little more fine grained and softer. it is just too massive, and the material accentuate the mass of this, and with the white it will be even more exaggerated. president olague: this could be part of a motion. there was a mention that the staff continues to work with the architect around this issue. there is no motion on the floor. it could be included in the motion. >> there are more details in the material itself. the stuff is fine with how these materials are applied in the building. i think we can work with it. commissioner sugaya: i will go
ahead and make a motion, since everybody is chomping at the bit. president olague: we are not chomping, just discussing. commissioner sugaya: yes, we are. i will move to approve with conditions. one of which is the already agreed to a california code. the second is to take the comments about the design, especially from commissioner moore, and direct staff to work with the project architect to try to soften the effect, let's say. last week's saitoich design was not metal. it was some kind of would impregnated with cement. -- wood impregnated with cement. he had samples which are not that different from what is being passed around here,
although it is a different material. it was flat. it was great. [laughter] i suppose if you knocked on it, it would be different, but nobody will be doing that except window cleaners. but i think it architect and project sponsor understand the direction of the commission at this point. if there could be something considered in terms of material change, incorporating commissioner moore's corner element change, with respect to reversing the living room arrangement on the interior, my former comment about the four story building, and seeing how perhaps the main elements could be reversed change the scale, going east, and -- commissioner borden: i am going
to second your motion. commissioner moore: with the parking, perhaps restate that to us, because of what the neighborhood wants and what we recommend are different things. i am inclined to let what the department said, which follows code and is typical for other situations, guide what we approved. could you please repeat? >> currently, your draft motion gives 99 spaces, the one required car share space. in communication with the neighborhood, 103 spaces. commissioner borden: the others would be car share. >> it is not necessarily related to the residential units. commissioner borden: you said there was no excess reporting. i was not clear on that.
it could be allowed. i think we want to keep the car share space. >> just to clarify, it is the one to one residential parking of 1998. it is three car shares bases. it could be increased to four by taking away a bmr unit space. we have also asked for some parking for the employees of the retail space. that would be 107? president olague: i am not attached to the retail addition. vice president miguel: i would not go with the retail. commissioner sugaya: 3 of which
are car share. one could be converted. >> part of the motion? commissioner sugaya: yes. i have one other comment to the neighbors. commissioner moore was talking about shadow and sunlight, and use the word west. the sun comes up on the east. all your units face the east. this building, in my mind, will not affect any eastern light into 1755, 1735, and 1725 van ness condos. >> regarding the design materials, the living areas, the corner lanthorn element, and the bay windows on washington -- are those recommendations, or actual conditions?
requirements? >> i think recommendations. commissioner sugaya: the washington st. 1, i think you can work with them -- street one, i think you can work with them. i would like to make a living room/bedrooms which a condition. -- bedroom switch a condition commissioner moore: i would like to ask that staff periodically, as this project moves forward, report to us on how it is going. this is an important project. we have other major changes coming upon van ness. guiding the project requires us to look at it more closely. otherwise, we will be overwhelmed with what is coming down the track.
we should share this with some push back, without taking entitlement, but moving in this direction which has a larger signature. commissioner antonini: we had a discussion with the sponsor and architect about percentage of placing. there is a maximum which this building is below. it gives the appearance of there being a lot of glazing. but wherever we can emphasize the non-glazed elements is coin to be helpful. if you look at some of the renderings across the street, we have new buildings and all buildings. you have a cristiani johnson designed one over between washington and jackson, and three 20's style buildings between clay and sacramento. we are trying to create vertical elements that play with those buildings. in this rendering, with these
white bays and the white collar of those bays, and the dark areas -- all these other buildings have a consistent color all the way up, of berkeley. it looks like these are stucco elements on the older buildings. probably the same thing on the more modern building. i think that would be helpful. also, some sort of cornice element or treatment that makes the end of the building have been nicer capital to it, the release signifies the end of the building, as with all the buildings directly across from it. >> commissioners, you have a motion. the motion on the floor for approval with conditions.
basically, the conditions are to include the conditions from the prior approval. staff will continue working with the project architect and sponsor on design. there is an additional condition that the bedroom and living room situations peace -- peace which. a suggestion -- be switched. there is a suggestion that we looked at the vertical line. and staff will report back to you on the progress of this product in the future. commissioner moore: could be precise that the bedrooms which occur at the corner of california and clay? >> the corner of van ness aand clay. commissioner moore: periodically, not just once. reporting will be periodically. i want to see the discussions
involved. >> i assume that is fine with the maker? and the parking is 103 spaces. commissioner antonini: -- vice president miguel: including three car share spaces. commissioner antonini: aye commissioner borden: aye. commissioner fong: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: ayw. -- aye. president olague: aye. we are taking a 20-minute recess. >> for those of you who are interested, the earthquake was a 3.9. the reason it felt strong was because of where it was centered. commissioner sugaya: you may be interested to know this building is supported on what is called a base isolation system, which would have
>> the product would replace the acupuncture facility and replace them with tree their rooms at 325-329 kearny st. between thein and bush streets. within the downtown office district. the planning commission authorize the establishment in march of 2010. since that time, it has operated without incident or complaints from the police or health departments. his proposal does not include any of exterior alterations to the building. the project complies with all planning code criteria for use. the department has contacted the department of public health and the police department and neither agency has concerns about the applicant proposed for massages use. the applicant proposes an expansion of the massager use within an existing establishment
as it exists. it meets all of the planning code. i would be happy to answer any questions that we have. president olague: progress sponsor? -- project sponsor? >> good evening. we believe the motion in our application speaks very clearly so i will keep my comments brief. this business is a money-losing operation. they are not able to meet projected revenues due to the current allowed allocated use. the floor space available is allocated for demands that do not exist. where demand exists, there is not enough for space. this application will allow them to adjust and meet market demand, and prevent the loss of a small business, prevent layoffs, and create future job opportunities.
i am happy to have any -- i am happy to answer any questions you may have. president olague: is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. vice president miguel: i move to approve this condition. >> second. commissioner sugaya: i would like to put on the record that the company that i work for is within a small distance of this establishment. around the corner on bush street. since i am a less than 10% owner, i do not think there are any conflict issues here. president olague: thank you. there is a motion on the floor for approval as the pros -- as proposed.
>> i am sorry. i was out of the room. i did not hear the presentation. commissioner borden: aye. commissioner fong: aye. supervisor mar: aye. vice president miguel: aye. aye. -- president olague: aye. >> the motion passes unanimously. you are now on item 10a. >> this is a 309 request for determination of compliance to convert this into a mixed use 67 residential units, eight off- street parking spaces, and a 210-square-foot ground-floor commercial space. this project has been modified
in response to concerns raised at the september hearing. the changes to the project include reduced number of dwelling units from 67 to 62. expanded the interior courtyards to reduce the number of dwelling units that require an exposure variants from 40 to 24. decrease the number of studio units from 48 to 43 and maintain the number of 1-bedroom units at 19. ex granted the commercial space to 535 square feet. a dedicated space in the garage for car share parking. rearrange the bicycle parking by moving its bases closer to the residential entrances and exits. modify in the exterior design by replacing the proposed windows with those featuring ray mutton pattern similar to those on the building. placing glass awnings on the
grounds for commercial and residential entrances. the department has not received any public comment on the project and recommends approval with conditions that the proposal provides 62 new drilling units, including nine on-site affordable units and provides a new commercial space. the product meets all applicable requirements of the planning code, except for one, for which a variance has been requested. in it meets the policies of the general claim. i would be happy to answer any questions. thank you very much. president olague: project sponsor? >> good afternoon. i am here on behalf of the sponsor. we have tried to address the comments to the commission that were made one month ago when we were here.
the main issue at the time was the light and air exposure of the dwelling. we have reduced the number of units by five. gone down from 67 to 62. as i show here on the floor plan, the yellow represents expansions of these courtyards. the size of the one courtyard has been doubled. the other one has been substantially increased. the commercial space -- or a number of comments about making that larger. we have doubled the size. up to 535. in the last iteration, hit only 38% of the dwelling units met
the exposure requirements. we have increased that up to 64%. those are the primary changes. i have prepared a day -- i have prepared a transparency to compare the two. it is going to be too small for you to read it, but i have packets that i will pass out. there will be 2 pages. the first page, it shows the breakdown by square footage of each type of unit, studio, 1- bedroom, 1-bedroom and a loft,
and so forth. the new project is a total of 22,000 square feet down from 23,900. in the main difference is the number of units that meets the dwelling unit exposure requirement, which is up to 64%. a substantial increase in the courtyard is the main change. also, the remaining units, other than the ones that are now getting exposure through the courtyard are larger than they were in the last iteration. we will be happy to answer any questions. drake is also happy to answer questions that you may have. thank you. president olague: is there any
public comment on this item? seeing none, a public comment is closed. commissioner miguel. vice president miguel: i have a question for the project sponsor. i am trying to figure out from the plans, particularly on the 30 studio and lost units in the newly designed project, what is the loft for? >> what is the loft for? vice president miguel: yes. it is a 300-square-foot unit, what are you using the logic for? >> it could be used for sleeping. it is not counted in the floor area because the ceiling height is too short. technically, it is a storage area. vice president miguel: my problem is exactly what you
said. i was trying to figure out how it could possibly be used for a sleeping area and you hit your nose on the ceiling. just about. obviously, it would not conform to any building codes in that regard. i am trying to determine from the drawings where you are going to live and put a bed. in this type of unit. >> i think we had that discussion the last time. we are trying to keep the density high and the price low so it meets a segment of the population that could not otherwise afford to live and that part of the city. there will be a segment of the population that finds that adequate. that is the segment of the market we are going for. i