Development Committee Report On 88 Arkansas

Potrero Boosters Development Committee
Development Criteria
Development Criteria:
Comments:
1. Is the overall project design sensitive to the

neighborhood surrounding the subject project?
Consideration will be made to neighborhood
character, scale, light, air quality, and vistas.
The project is located in a transition zone between

industrial and residential uses and is in keeping with the
massing and proportion of adjacent existing and
proposed developments between 17th and 16th Streets.
The project is on the north side of the Playground,
minimizing any shadow impacts, and will contain a
commercial space and improved sidewalk elements thus
complimenting the pedestrian realm at the intersection
of 17th and Arkansas Streets.
2. Is the projects massing sufficiently broken-up relative

to the size of its parcel?
The project consists of two approximately 150 building

masses separated by a massing break. The individual
masses are broken up with a fine-grained approach to
fenestration and delineation of residential floors above a
two-story building base. The immediate neighboring
buildings are generally large full-site coverage industrial
buildings.
3. Are there any hazardous materials on site? If so, what

are they and how will they be remediated.
Slightly elevated concentrations of lead have been found

in the soil due to the fact that the site was used as
earthquake fill. Working with the San Francisco Dept of
Public Health, a site mitigation plan will be prepared to
ensure complete compliance while excavation work
takes place.
4. Does the project incorporate or preserve any

historic elements on the site?
Per the San Franciscos Planning Dept 2011 survey,

there are no historic resources on the site.
5. Does the project incorporate additional family

friendly and accessible design (with respect to
common open space or play areas, the number of
elevator lobbies, and hallway length)?
Two elevator lobbies on opposite sides of the building

are provided; no unit is more than 80 feet from an
elevator; a large common open space area
accommodating a variety of programs is provided on
the roof; two courtyards are provided on the podium
level. A solarium/gym is provided at the 5th level. All
units are on an accessible route.
6. What is the percentage of 2 and 3 bedroom units in

the project (with the goal being at least 10% 3 BR and
an aggregate of 60% being 2 BR or larger)?
41% two bedrooms are provided.
7. Does the project include onsite affordable housing,

and to what extent does the amount of affordable
housing exceed the mandate (with the Boosters goal
of at least 30% of units affordable)?
We are voluntarily increasing to 20% onsite affordable

housing, which equates to 25 units. 18 units are
required per planning requirement of 14.4%
8. Does the project include publicly accessible indoor

space?
No
9. Does the project include publicly accessible open

green space?
No
Comments:
10. Does the project take appropriate advantage of its

zoning (e.g., urban mixed use) and its location to
activate the streetscape, engage the public, and
enhance street safety?
The project is zoned UMU and is located directly

across from Jackson Playground. Retail will front 17th
Street and directly face Jackson Playground. The
streetscape will be upgraded with new sidewalks and
landscaping. A new corner bulb-out and parklet are
both proposed at the corner.
11. To what extent is planned commercial space

neighborhood serving, available for locally owned
business, or available for non-profits?
The commercial space is designed to accommodate a

range of potential uses. Clear ceiling heights up to
approximately 18 and approximately 3,200 SF of space
that can be demised in a variety of ways. The space will
be designed to accommodate exhaust for a commercial
kitchen thus accommodating a restaurant, should the
future tenant require one.
12. Does the project incorporate PDR space?
No
13. Does the project include the maximum allowable

vehicle parking?
Yes
14. To what extent does the project exceed the

minimum requirement of on-site car-share spaces or
otherwise support public transit?
Project meets the requirement for on-site car-share and

is within one block of the 10, 22, and 55 MUNI bus lines
15. Does the project take maximum advantage of bicycle

infrastructure for residents, guests, customers and
employees? Consideration will be made to the use of
bike storage and parking (including one class-one
space per bedroom), bike racks and participation in
bike-share.
The project provides for one class-one space per unit,

in a dedicated bicycle storage room. A bike repair
station is proposed to be located in the bicycle storage
area. Bicycle racks for retail customer use will be
located on the sidewalk.
16. To what extent does the project improve the

pedestrian experience (where positive features may
include setbacks, sidewalk widening, plantings and
other greening, street lighting, benches, etc.)?
The sidewalk will be redesigned to incorporate planter

pockets and landscaped zones along the building. Stoops
are proposed along Arkansas Street to both activate the
frontage and create a pedestrian buffer.
17. Has the developer coordinated with other nearby

developments with respect to the streetscape and
other features?
As the project progresses, we will reach out to other

potential adjacent developments.
18. How does the project make use of best practices in

green infrastructure and energy efficiency (such as
with water usage and solar panels).
The project will have a solar hot-water system,

photovoltaic panels, and reduce the flow of storm water
off the site. The project is being designed to meet LEED
Platinum requirements.
19. Are the operational features (loading docks, garage

doors, garbage areas, loading zones, etc.) of the
project sensitive to the surrounding neighbors and
uses?
The garage door is located furthest away from Jackson

Playground and mid block between 17th and 16th Streets;
the residential loading zone and garbage areas are
located within the building.
20. Are utilities undergrounded?
The project intends on undergrounding the utilities.
21. Will the development participate in the financing of

the Potrero Hill Shuttle?
We are generally very supportive of the shuttle and

would consider sponsoring once the project is built and
occupied.
Comments:
22. Are any impact fees paid in-kind targeted directly

towards Boosters supported or endorsed projects?
We are absolutely in favor of trying to pay fees in-kind

and welcome comments and suggestions from the
neighborhood. We have already reached out to Friends
of Jackson Playground as an area of interest.
23. To what extent does the project hire local

contractors and workers at prevailing wages?
The project will comply with the First Source Hiring

Program and the anticipated employee compensation by
trade will be consistent with area prevailing wages.
24. What exceptions from the Planning Code are being

sought?
Dwelling Unit Exposure for a limited number of units,

Rear Yard Modification.
25. What outreach have you done with nearby

neighbors? What have been their concerns and how
have you addressed them?
A pre-application neighborhood meeting was held on

March 23, 2015, additional meetings will take place in
the near future. Initial concerns include; a) the amount
of excavation required for two levels of below grade
parking, we have since changed to one level of below
grade parking, b) increase in traffic, we have since
engaged a traffic study consultant, c) the size/location of
the retail/commercial space, we have located the retail
space along the entire face of the 17th Street faade and
the intent is for it to be a neighborhood serving
caf/restaurant.
26. Have you received a PPA letter from the Planning

Department, or a design review from the UDAT or
Residential Design Team? Please attach.
PPA Letter attached
* * * * *
POTRERO BOOSTERS
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
S E RV I N G
T H E
H I L L
S I N C E
1 9 2 6
Development Committee
Comments and Recommendations
Date: April 15, 2015
Development Address: 88 Arkansas
We have reviewed the project and as a committee do not endorse or oppose it; that is up to
the full membership. All comments are preliminary and offered in the expectation of a project
that will benefit the neighborhood.
This 127-unit project is on the north side of Jackson Park, with 20% of the units designated as
affordable. The voluntary increase from the normal 12% qualifies the project for fast-tracking
through Planning and potential state-supported financing. This increase brings the total number
of affordable units to 25 (instead of 18 required by law). The other benefit of the project is the
inclusion of retail space, running almost the full length of the project along 17th street, intended
to attract a neighborhood-serving restaurant.
The quality of the overall design and ground level commercial space attracted positive
comments from members of the committee. The project includes a parklet, but no onsite public
open space. The developer is encouraged to incorporate a setback on the 17th Street side of the
building to expand the public realm, connecting it to Jackson Park and making it more inviting.
This would also enhance the 17th street retail space where the restaurant is expected to be
located. Developer contributions to publicly accessible open space, onsite or offsite, would help
alleviate neighborhood concerns over cumulative impacts on parks and recreational facilities.
The unit mix includes 25 studios, 50 one-bedroom units, and 52 two-bedroom units, with the
two-bedroom units averaging only 950 sq. feet. The most controversial issue amongst
Committee members is that the units are relatively small overall and that 75% of the 2 bedroom
apartments in the project dont have outside-facing windows for the second bedrooms,
potentially reducing these units to one bedroom units with a den. Some members felt that this
was not a family-friendly design, while others considered it is a viable option to maximize the
living areas and common space, and felt that it would be appropriate for a younger childs room
as well as being allowed by the Planning Code. With a goal of more family-friendly design, the
Committee recommends that all projects include at least 10% three-bedroom units, as well as
setting a goal of 60% units with two or more bedrooms. The Committee urges the developer
for this project to reduce the overall number of units to incorporate larger units suitable for
families.
The committee appreciates the developers commitment to increase the number of affordable
units in the project to 20%. As is the case with all neighborhood developments, we are
interested in finding ways to increase that ratio to 30-33% of the units by making some
apartments affordable to middle-income earners (making 80-120% of San Francisco

median income). Current BMR requirements do not include any mandate for middle-income
housing, and the City has a very large deficit for this demographic as a result. We are currently
researching ways to enforce an increased affordable housing commitment, and will attempt to
draft an agreement with the developers for this particular project.
The site is subject to the Maher Ordinance governing identification and removal of hazardous
materials and contaminated soils. There are 12 USTs known to be within 1000 feet of the
project and the committee has not seen a site mitigation plan as of yet. Given even the slightest
potential for soil contamination with sensitive receptors in the immediate area, the Committee
considers a Phase 2 study to be appropriate. The project will partially block public vistas from
Jackson Park and the committee anticipates a shadow study to determine potential impacts on
Jackson Park. They also expect to review a transportation study, which Planning expects will be
completed in September or October 2015. Until these studies are complete it is not clear
whether the project will, or should, qualify for a Community Plan Exemption.
The developer is expected to make a presentation to the full membership at a future Boosters
meeting.

Development Committee Report On 88 Arkansas

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Development Committee Report On 88 Arkansas

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Development Committee Report On 88 Arkansas

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Potrero Boosters Development Committee

1. Is the overall project design sensitive to the

The project is located in a transition zone between

2. Is the projects massing sufficiently broken-up relative

The project consists of two approximately 150 building

3. Are there any hazardous materials on site? If so, what

Slightly elevated concentrations of lead have been found

4. Does the project incorporate or preserve any

Per the San Franciscos Planning Dept 2011 survey,

5. Does the project incorporate additional family

Two elevator lobbies on opposite sides of the building

6. What is the percentage of 2 and 3 bedroom units in

41% two bedrooms are provided.

7. Does the project include onsite affordable housing,

We are voluntarily increasing to 20% onsite affordable

8. Does the project include publicly accessible indoor

9. Does the project include publicly accessible open

10. Does the project take appropriate advantage of its

The project is zoned UMU and is located directly

11. To what extent is planned commercial space

The commercial space is designed to accommodate a

12. Does the project incorporate PDR space?

13. Does the project include the maximum allowable

14. To what extent does the project exceed the

Project meets the requirement for on-site car-share and

15. Does the project take maximum advantage of bicycle

The project provides for one class-one space per unit,

16. To what extent does the project improve the

The sidewalk will be redesigned to incorporate planter

17. Has the developer coordinated with other nearby

As the project progresses, we will reach out to other

18. How does the project make use of best practices in

The project will have a solar hot-water system,

19. Are the operational features (loading docks, garage

The garage door is located furthest away from Jackson

20. Are utilities undergrounded?

The project intends on undergrounding the utilities.

21. Will the development participate in the financing of

We are generally very supportive of the shuttle and

22. Are any impact fees paid in-kind targeted directly

We are absolutely in favor of trying to pay fees in-kind

23. To what extent does the project hire local

The project will comply with the First Source Hiring

24. What exceptions from the Planning Code are being

Dwelling Unit Exposure for a limited number of units,

25. What outreach have you done with nearby

A pre-application neighborhood meeting was held on

26. Have you received a PPA letter from the Planning

PPA Letter attached

apartments affordable to middle-income earners (making 80-120% of San Francisco

You might also like