Not to prolong. So, totally agree with commissioner moore in terms of e. I. R. Typically within the e. I. R. , you are asking questions usually within the confines of what is analyzed under the e. I. R. And then they come out in their responses and i just think that this is it is incumbent upon us to really have a broader conversation that requires starting from the beginning and so i go back to my comments that this spros a little bit chicken and egg. And as a project sponsor would say, i want to do this. And heres my project description. They dont have an incentive. And i would say the power to just say i want the zoning on this lot to be x, y and z and that is what im going to do. They can request it. Right. But im saying with this particular project. I think that there are a lot of policy issues that are newer in the city. Im just saying that i wouldnt expect that a project sponsor for this project would say, hey, im just going to build rm1 and thats what i want to do. I think were in agreement. Im just pointing thaout our spros lail backwards sometimes. Sometimes we have to state what we want first and then make an agreement around that. Instead of putting pressure on the project sponsor to read our minds about what we want. And especially because the project sponsor know what we want before they show up. Thats all. And i would make the area right around here, getting to your point, director, about whether or not to increase the density on this lot would be challenging for the neighbourhood or the character around it. I would say that there is multifamily buildings around, like directly adjacent and right around the blocks where this lot is. So, i think thats kind of what drove my initial impression that why are we Building FourSingle Family homes here when we have a school down the street, weve got multifamily buildings within a oneblock radius. So, why would we go backwards . Commissioner melgar . Thank you. Let me take a stab at verbalizing what i think were all feeling. You know, in response to your comment, i think that, you know, in terms of the question that were posing, the e. I. R. , you know, is looking at this as a Historic Resource and proposing several alternatives and mitigations to the loss of that Historic Resource. And i think what were saying is that what were getting in terms of the mitigations is not great. Its not sufficient. We are getting four 3600square foot houses with two Parking Spaces each, which is not consistent with what this commission has been supporting in a transitrich area that is close to a lot of services. And that is what were trading for this Historic Resource in breaking up this beautiful sidewalk that cannot be recreated. I mean, it can be recreated but not, you know, moved. [please stand by] [please stand by] theres a precedent for this in the neighborhood and we need to take a look at that. Absolutely and i support everything that every commissioner has said. If i had to put it in position of questions, how do we know objective number 5 was not met on the partial preservation alternative . How do we know the structural report is accurate, given where weve been with mr. Santos . I question that. Through the chair . We have a question, this is for the record, mr. Silverman. Normally we take questions and, in this case, and i understand the concern of the commission and generally agree with you. What its doing, though, is causing us to go back with the project sponsor and causing us to rethink from the beginning. Theres questioning about the e. I. R. And to recognize the history of the site. Thats one bucket that i heard questions and comments about, that should be appropriately responded to in the e. I. R. To me, its surprising, you know, that its rh1 oh, its 2. Okay. That makes a little more sense. You know, i think theres other questions about, can we get more density and maybe they can be incorporated into the buildings. That makes more sense. Commissioner richards . Vice president richards what is a reasonable rate of return . Were using terms here. Is it 20 to you . 6 to me . I have no idea. Its too general. There needs to be a yardstick. Commissioner moore i think those are all great questions, but they do not help us in response to whats in front of us. Were supposed to speak to Vice President richards but its in here. President hillis i think hes asking why its not a viable option. I think those are legitimate, standard e. I. R. Questions that need to be looked at. Commissioner moore one of the very difficult questions is that were going from public, Community Use to private development, private developer development, which doesnt have any relation in any form or shape to the users that use the church. And thats a question that i think you can ask the e. I. R. Why is there not housing built for the Lgbtq Community on the site that benefits those who have used the church . Thats a tough question to answer because the church sold the property, but in the city, for the city, and for the rest, its taking a lot and not giving much back and that could be a question we should ask. President hillis seeing no further comments on the e. I. R. , did you Vice President richards i wanted to point out so we dont go down a path that will never happen. The santos report was one of five reports and i asked the planning staff to make sure and highlight that in the e. I. R. They assured us that that was not possible. But i wanted to bring to your attention that there are five separate structural reports that all came to the same conclusion. President hillis it will be an answer to the comment Vice President richards i think president hillis lets get them answered in the e. I. R. If you have Additional Information that you want to provide to the staff, thats helpful, but probably thats the better forum for that, not here, now. Thank you. President hillis and, again, well hear the case in the future. Well have the draft, Draft Environmental Impact report back to us with answers to these questions and comments and questions and comments can still be submitted. If you gave verbal comments, you can supplement with written comments by 5 00 p. M. On january 23. So thank you. Very good. That places us on item 12. 201601557imp, 188 hooper street, 111 7th street, and ultimate properties with the college of arts. This is their institution usual master plan. Good afternoon. This is a California College of the arts master plan. Weve submitted to be on file with the Planning Department. This is the 2013 i. M. P. And that was accepted on april 22, 2016. The college is currently comprised of two campuses, one in oakland and the other in San Francisco. Cca is filing this revised i. M. P. Because theyre planning to consolidate the campuses. It will further the colleges mission to serve its students and engage the broader public. Headquarters is 1111 8th street. Cca also leases properties elsewhere in the city including 1321 mission street, Student Housing project, 38 harriet street, Student Housing, 350 kansas, and 75 arkansas street, another Student Housing project. The contents of the i. M. P. Include the nature of the institution, its history and growth. The physical changes in the neighborhood, and the employment characteristics, service population, physical characteristics, access, traffic and circulation patterns and Development Plan that includes avena 5year and 10year plan. The special use district is intended to facilitate the continued operation of the California College of the arts at 1111 8th street, which is characterized by instruction in the Industrial Arts and or fine arts while providing a regulatory scheme for an expansion of the campus of the future. Art and design was created to facilitate the continued expansion of cca. This sets forth a plan on which to guide set growth and expansion. To date, the department has not received public correspondence, but it has relating to the project scope in its entirety. No further Planning Commission action is required and the acceptance of i. M. P. Does not indicate approval. It acknowledges that the i. M. P. Has the required items and theres been a public hearing. In holding a public hearing, theyve fulfilled the requirements. This concludes staffs presentation. Im happy to answer any question questions. President hillis okay. Project sponsor, welcome. Good afternoon. Im david merkel, campus planning. Cca is fully accredited, nonprofit, independent college of arts and design, founded in the east bay in 1907 in the aftermath of the great earthquake and fire. We still do that stuff, the drawing classes. We offer a broad curriculum in the arts that attract students and faculty from around the world. When we established our San Francisco campus in the Showplace Square area three decades ago, the neighborhood was dominated by Light Industrial and many undeveloped parcels. Since then, cca has played an instrumental role in transforming the area into a thriving arts, design and Innovation District and were especially excited about sf maids presence next to us. Our updated master plan shows a plan to unify the plan in san fan and 2 3 of our operations are here. This would colocate all 1,950 students, 480 faculty and 260 staff in a single location. Its currently logistically challenging to maintain campuses on both sides of the bay and campus unification will make life easier for students and promote crosspollination across all programs. You will recall we worked closely with planning staff for housing for students. We house up to half of our student body. First of these is on the left of the slide, the panoramic. The said you saw last year and under correction right now at 75 arkansas and will open in the fall. And the final piece of oncampus housing will be presented to you momentarily. Our project goals are these three large ones. Its to make the new unified campus part of our curriculum by making it creatively hackable, so it can change with our curriculum. We expect it to be sustainably agile. Were a top 10 green building, but expect this one to produce more energy than it consumes. And then most importantly, we strive to continue to be a connective campus to our immediate surrounding in the greater bay area region. Our plan has two components. And theyre on coordinated but separate tracks that will happen over the next four to five years. Theres an academic facility expansion and renovation by studio gang thats in the early stages of design development. And theres an oncampus Housing Element thats further along in development, that will open a year earlier, fall, 2020. Well come back to you in next few months to review the housing and you will hear about both these Design Concepts next. Let me in tro he deuce first steve introduce first steve weisenthal. Thank you, david. I would like to begin with this image of the neighborhood in transition, with 8th street in the foreground, current cca academic building, former greyhound maintenance shed, elevated 280 and sites for the School Expansion and Student Housing, as david mentioned. Highlighted here are the current cca facilities within with a threeblock radius with sites for the project were presenting today indicated as 188 hooper for Student Housing, and you will soon see the New Academic Building that will allow cca to unify the campus. The principles are illustrated here from a campus perspective in connection with the neighborhood. The project and street scape improvements will be a big step in transforming from a collection of freestanding buildings to a true campus, connected to and accessible by the existing streets and green scapes as an economic catalyst in the evolving neighborhood. Zeroing in on the project site with the existing buildings in white and in blue the footprints of the Student Housing and New Academic Building that will span between hooper and erwin streets, framing a new courtyard. The project will add street trees, improve sidewalk crossings and maintain onstreet parking. The Design Concept that we called ecologizing the factory is about teaching, making, collaboration in the existing cca building by layering in new campus landscapes on two levels, hence the name, double ground. On the ground level of the New Academic Building is a 50,000squarefoot large, interdisciplinary space housing ceramic kilns, and campusscaled yard that spans hooper and erwin streets between the existing building and the new and within the new building, several open court yards enable art making and teaching to spill outside. On top of that, a pavilion with classrooms and space including a cafe and rooftop space for socializing and teaching, connecting by a pathway to the second floor of the existing building. In this crosssectional diagram, the connectivity between the levels of the double ground are intended to expose students to art and design activities and to connect them to, as david mentioned, a sustainably agile approach to energy and the environment. I will conclude my portion with these two shots. The first illustrating the transparency into the shops. And the second, artmaking activity in flexible, open shop space with visibility into the background. Good afternoon, commissioners. This project is for affordable Student Housing immediately adjacent to the main building. Our goal is to express cca as a campus by expanding the existing red, graded structure into an identifiable, architectural language. 8th street is a broad cca campus frontage of complimentary and related buildings. The construction of the building involves the demolition of three existing singlestory buildings and maintains the 24,000squarefoot building. The new building is five stories and 135,000 square feet with 520 beds for cca students in single, double and triple occupancy units. Primarily for freshmen with some upperlevel graduate students. There are structures forming two court yards connected above by two bridges the project includes an 8,500squarefoot cafe on the corner of 8th and hooper street. There are 164 bike Parking Spaces and no vehicular parking. There is also improvements to channel, 8th and hooper streets. A large sidewalk rationalizes the street grids at 8th and carolina, decreasing the asphalt and providing a triangular parklet with seating and landscape at the main entry to the building. Another is proposed on hooper in front of the cafe to expand sidewalk dining opportunities. 23 new street trees will be planted along the frontages. This is a typical floorplan showing the units along double h connected by bridges. The elevators and the two bridges are shared common spaces. The interconnected court yards provides 10,000 square feet of outdoor space including a courtyard shared with the graduate center. This is a view of 8th and hooper street showing the existing building architecture expanded to the new building as an identifiable campus language and the ground floor opening on to the corner. This is a view at the intersection of channel and 8th and the entry to the cca campus. And, lastly, the landscaped court of the housing wings of the shared common areas bridging above. That concludes our presentation. And were happy to answer any questions. Thank you. President hillis thank you. Is there any Public Comment on this item . Good afternoon, commissioners, president hillis. Im here to discuss the history of the relationship of the cca and the neighborhoods surrounding it. Cca has been a Good Neighborhood partner. This relationship is evidenced by the boosters past support of the development actions. Weve supported the Student Housing project currently under construction at 75 arkansas. Why does this relationship work so well . Well, cca actively engaging with the student. It takes on projects from the unique seating system at the park and working with working groups for a design project. Cca staff has partnered to develop a successfully implemented parking plan and participates in meetings surrounding the citys homeless problem. That were here today is another example of ccas cooperation with the community. Were used to Higher Institution that act outside of their plans and try to make up for it well after the fact. Cca is following the process correctly, taking steps in the right order. As a result, we look forward to continuing our work with cca. Were engaged on the design of Student Housing that you saw and we will be engaged in the discussions regarding the New Academic Building. And we look forward to working on those raised in the master plan and working on the provision of that equipped bicycle structure and reducing the congestion that may be caused on overreliance of traffic. Thank you very much. President hillis thank you. Sue hester. This is two weeks in a row that ive been here supporting an Academic Institution thats doing the right thing. I want to stress that and its important, really. People stepping up that are post secondary education institutions to be part of the community, even when they have a solution of creatively hackable. Thats the first time ive heard this as a goal. I dont object. I think that creatively hackable, addressing the project. We are a city that has had post secondary educational institutions since our beginning. And its a re