Conditional Use - SF Planningcommissions.sfplanning.org/cpcpackets/2014.0401CUA - REVISED.pdf · The Marchese Company, Inc. P.O. Box B Corte Madera, CA 94976 Staff Contact: Carly

www.sfplanning.org

Executive Summary Conditional Use

HEARING DATE: DECEMBER 8, 2016 Date: November 28, 2016 Case No.: 2014.0401CUAVAR Project Address: 827-829 Kearny Street Zoning: CCB – Chinatown Community Business 65-N Height and Bulk District Block/Lot: 0194/004 Project Sponsor: Ralph Marchese The Marchese Company, Inc. P.O. Box B Corte Madera, CA 94976 Staff Contact: Carly Grob– (415) 575-9138 [email protected] Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project includes the demolition of an existing two-story commercial structure and the construction of a four-story mixed use building with 1,635 square feet of ground floor retail, 7,520 square feet of institutional use at the basement, first, second and third floors (d.b.a. Buddha’s Universal Church), and one 2,319 square foot dwelling unit (1,858 net square feet) at the fourth floor intended for seniors in the church community. The proposed institutional uses would connect to the adjacent property at 825 Kearny via a pedestrian bridge at the second floor, which would also provide access to the institution’s existing primary church building at 720 Washington Street. Many of the custom design features that exist at 720 Washington will be replicated in the proposed buildings, including custom-designed balcony railings.

SITE DESCRIPTION AND PRESENT USE The project is located on the west side of Kearny Street, between Washington and Jackson Streets, Block 0194, Lot 004. The subject property is located within the Chinatown Community Business District (CCB) and the 65-N Height and Bulk District. The subject property is located within the Chinatown National Register Historic District, and is considered a non-contributory building. The property is developed with a vacant two-story commercial building, which was constructed in 1922. The commercial storefront is separated into two units. The first, larger unit (827 Kearny) is approximately 4,935 square feet, and provides access to the second floor, basement, and rear storage space. 827 Kearny has been vacant since 2011. Residential use was added to the second floor some time in the 1930’s without any building permits, but has also been vacant since 1997. The second commercial unit (829 Kearny) is approximately 648 square feet, and was previously occupied by Jin Wei International Trading Company, a retailer of Chinese art and furniture. 829 Kearny has been vacant since March, 2016.

mailto:[email protected]

Executive Summary CASE NO. 2014.0401CUAVAR Hearing Date: December 8, 2016 827 Kearny Street

2

Buddha’s Universal Church (BUC) is a non-profit religious organization founded in 1949, headquartered at 720 Washington Street. A historical and cultural center in Chinatown, the Church offers religious services dedicated to the principal teachings of the Buddha. In addition, the BUC welcomes the community to attend regularly scheduled lectures, classes, tours, celebrations, and performances at the Church. The BUC has undertaken this project to provide multi-purpose space to support the continued teachings of the church, attract and retain a younger demographic to the Church while also providing their elder members a housing opportunity supported by the church.

The BUC headquarters at 720 Washington was designed by renowned Bay Area architect, Worley Wong, and was constructed entirely by volunteers over the span of 11 years. Members of the community made monthly contributions, fundraised, and pledged hours of labor until the completion of the four-story building in 1963.

SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND NEIGHBORHOOD The project site is on Kearny Street between Jackson and Washington Streets at the eastern edge of Chinatown bordering the Financial District. Portsmouth Square is a half of a block to the south, and Columbus Avenue is one and a half blocks north. The Project site is located in the Chinatown Community Business District, which is considered a transitional edge to Chinatown and is characterized by street level retail and small business activities. The food service establishments are primarily restaurants. The surrounding properties are located within the Chinatown Visitor Retail and Chinatown Residential Neighborhood Commercial Districts. Immediately to the north of the subject property is a three-story building with ground floor retail and residential on the upper floors. The property immediately adjacent to the south is a two-story building with ground floor retail and institutional at the second floor. Directly across the street to the east are a 14-story post-secondary educational building, a four-story elementary school and a 15-story senior residential facility. The project site is also located at the eastern edge of the Chinatown Historic District, which is characterized by two- to three- story development and continuous facades at the street level. Ground floors and storefronts in the District are often fully glazed with regular form and proportion, and usually include recessed entries flanked by shop windows. Generally, upper-story windows are slightly recessed, and are tall, narrow, evenly spaced, and usually feature elaborate frames or moldings. Heavy projecting cornices and parapets are characteristic of the District and decorative sheet metal or copper cornices are common. Many buildings are constructed with brick masonry with some marble entrances at the ground floor. Chinese motifs, balconies, and pseudo pagodas are also common in the District.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW On November 29, 2016, the Project was determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) as a Class 32 Categorical Exemption under CEQA as described in the determination contained in the Planning Department files for this Project;


3

HEARING NOTIFICATION

TYPE REQUIRED PERIOD

REQUIRED NOTICE DATE

ACTUAL NOTICE DATE

ACTUAL PERIOD

Classified News Ad 20 days November 18, 2016 November 16, 2016 22 days

Posted Notice 20 days November 18, 2016 November 17, 2016 21 days

Mailed Notice 20 days November 18, 2016 November 18, 2016 20 days

PUBLIC COMMENT/COMMUNITY OUTREACH To date, the Department has received one call in support of the project. The project sponsor has conducted extensive outreach, providing information about the project to

over 40 neighborhood groups and area residents. A full list of contacts is attached in the project sponsor submittal.

ISSUES AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS The project requires Variances from Planning Code Section 145.1 for providing a ground floor

ceiling height of less than 14 feet, and Section 136 for balconies that exceed 9 feet in length at their maximum projection. The project also seeks a Site Coverage Modification, as a portion of the required 25% open area is provided on the front balcony rather than the rear yard. The Zoning Administrator will consider the request for Variances the Site Coverage Modification immediately following the Planning Commission decision.

Although the applicant has indicated that there was residential use at the second floor of the

subject property starting in the 1930’s, the space was exclusively occupied by the property owners and their extended family. The second floor was never offered as a rental unit, and has been vacant since 1997. The Department has determined that the removal of this space would not constitute the removal of an unauthorized dwelling unit pursuant to Planning Code Section 317, as there is no direct access to the residential unit without entering the commercial space, and the applicant has provided sufficient information that the residential use ceased well before the controls for the removal of unauthorized dwelling units.

REQUIRED COMMISSION ACTION In order for the project to proceed, the Commission must grant Conditional Use authorization to allow the construction of a building exceeding 35 feet in height pursuant to Planning Code Section 254, and to exceed the permitted bulk length dimension pursuant to Planning Code Section 270. Additionally, the Commission must also grant Conditional Use authorization to allow a use size exceeding 5,000 square feet within the Chinatown Community Business District pursuant to Planning Code Section 121.4.

BASIS FOR RECOMMENDATION The project replaces a vacant commercial building with a mixed-use buiding which will activate

the pedestrian realm and provide compatible uses at the upper floors.


4

The project would allow a religious institution that is deeply rooted within the Chinatown community to expand while maintaining the fine-grained scale of development.

The proposed expansion will allow the Church to continue to attract young members to the community, promoting intergenerational interactions.

The project would provide one dwelling unit for senior members of Buddha’s Universal Church. The proposed building is compatible with the Chinatown Historic District and is in keeping with

the Chinatown design guidelines. On balance, the project meets all applicable requirements of the Planning Code. The project is desirable for, and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Conditions

Attachments: Block Book Map Sanborn Map Zoning Map Aerial Photographs Site Photograph Public Correspondence (see also Project Sponsor Submittal) CEQA Categorical Exemption Project Sponsor Submittal, including: - Correspondence in Support - Community Outreach Contacts - Exhibits related to requested Variances - Reduced Existing and Proposed Plans


5

Attachment Checklist

Executive Summary Project sponsor submittal

Draft Motion Drawings: Existing Conditions

Environmental Determination Check for legibility

Zoning District Map Drawings: Proposed Project

Height & Bulk Map Check for legibility

Parcel Map 3-D Renderings (new construction or significant addition)

Sanborn Map Check for legibility

Aerial Photo Wireless Telecommunications Materials

Context Photos Health Dept. review of RF levels

Site Photos RF Report

Community Meeting Notice

Housing Documents

Inclusionary Affordable Housing Program: Affidavit for Compliance

Exhibits above marked with an “X” are included in this packet CG ______

Planner's Initials

KG: G:\Documents\Projects\1423 Polk\2011.0097C - 1423 Polk Street - Exec Sum.doc

www.sfplanning.org

Subject to: (Select only if applicable)

Affordable Housing (Sec. 415)

Jobs Housing Linkage Program (Sec. 413)

Downtown Park Fee (Sec. 412)

First Source Hiring (Admin. Code)

Child Care Requirement (Sec. 414)

x Other

Planning Commission Draft Motion HEARING DATE: DECEMBER 8, 2016

Date: November 28, 2016 Case No.: 2014.0401CUAVAR Project Address: 827-829 Kearny Street Zoning: CCB – Chinatown Community Business 65-N Height and Bulk District Block/Lot: 0194/004 Project Sponsor: Ralph Marchese The Marchese Company, Inc. P.O. Box B Corte Madera, CA 94976 Staff Contact: Carly Grob– (415) 575-9138 [email protected] Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

ADOPTING FINDINGS RELATING TO THE APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE AUTHORIZATION PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 121.4, 254, 270 AND 303 OF THE PLANNING CODE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A BUILDING EXCEEDING 35 FEET IN HEIGHT, TO ESTABLISH A USE SIZE EXCEEDING 5,000 SQUARE FEET, AND TO EXCEED THE PERMITTED BULK LENGTH DIMENSION WITHIN THE CCB (CHINATOWN COMMUNITY BUSINESS) DISTRICT AND A 65-N HEIGHT AND BULK DISTRICT. PREAMBLE On July 28, 2015, Ralph Marchese (hereinafter “Project Sponsor”) filed an application with the Planning Department (hereinafter “Department”) on behalf of 827 Kearny, LLC (hereinafter “Property Owner”) for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 121.4, 254, 270 and 303 to allow the construction of a building exceeding 35 feet in height, to establish a use size exceeding 5,000 square feet, and to exceed the permitted bulk length dimension within the CCB (Cluster, Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 65-N Height and Bulk District. On December 8, 2016, the San Francisco Planning Commission (hereinafter “Commission”) conducted a duly noticed public hearing at a regularly scheduled meeting on Conditional Use Application No. 2014.0401CUA.

mailto:[email protected]

Draft Motion December 8, 2016

2

CASE NO. 2014.0401CUAVAR 827 Kearny Street

On November 26, 2016, the Project was determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) as a Class 32 Categorical Exemption under CEQA as described in the determination contained in the Planning Department files for this Project; The Commission has heard and considered the testimony presented to it at the public hearing and has further considered written materials and oral testimony presented on behalf of the applicant, Department staff, and other interested parties. MOVED, that the Commission hereby authorizes the Conditional Use requested in Application No. 2014.0401CUA, subject to the conditions contained in “EXHIBIT A” of this motion, based on the following findings: FINDINGS Having reviewed the materials identified in the preamble above, and having heard all testimony and arguments, this Commission finds, concludes, and determines as follows:

1. The above recitals are accurate and constitute findings of this Commission.

2. Site Description and Present Use. The project is located on the west side of Kearny Street, between Washington and Jackson Streets, Block 0194, Lot 004. The subject property is located within the Chinatown Community Business District (CCB) and the 65-N Height and Bulk District. The property is developed with a vacant two-story commercial building, which was constructed in 1922. The commercial storefront is separated into two units. The first, larger unit (827 Kearny) is approximately 4,935 square feet, and provides access to the second floor, basement, and rear storage space. 827 Kearny has been vacant since 2011. Residential use was added to the second floor some time in the 1930’s without any building permits, but has also been vacant since 1997. The second commercial unit (829 Kearny) is approximately 648 square feet, and was previously occupied by Jin Wei International Trading Company, a retailer of Chinese art and furniture. 829 Kearny has been vacant since March, 2016.

Buddha’s Universal Church (BUC) is a non-profit religious organization founded in 1949, headquartered at 720 Washington Street. A historical and cultural center in Chinatown, the Church offers religious services dedicated to the principal teachings of the Buddha. In addition, the BUC welcomes the community to attend regularly scheduled lectures, classes, tours, celebrations, and performances at the Church. The BUC has undertaken this project to provide multi-purpose space to support the continued teachings of the church, attract and retain a younger demographic to the Church while also providing their elder members a housing opportunity supported by the church. The BUC headquarters at 720 Washington was designed by renowned Bay Area architect, Worley Wong, and was constructed entirely by volunteers over the span of 11 years. Members of the community made monthly contributions, fundraised, and pledged hours of labor until the completion of the four-story building in 1963.


3


3. Surrounding Properties and Neighborhood. The project site is on Kearny Street between Jackson and Washington Streets at the eastern edge of Chinatown bordering the Financial District. Portsmouth Square is a half of a block to the south, and Columbus Avenue is one and a half blocks north. The Project site is located in the Chinatown Community Business District, which is considered a transitional edge to Chinatown and is characterized by street level retail and small business activities. The food service establishments are primarily restaurants. The surrounding properties are located within the Chinatown Visitor Retail and Chinatown Residential Neighborhood Commercial Districts. Immediately to the north of the subject property is a three-story building with ground floor retail and residential on the upper floors. The property immediately adjacent to the south is a two-story building with ground floor retail and institutional at the second floor. Directly across the street to the east are a 14-story post-secondary educational building, a four-story elementary school and a 15-story senior residential facility.

4. Project Description. The project includes the demolition of an existing two-story commercial

structure and the construction of a four-story mixed use building with 1,635 square feet of ground floor retail, 7,520 square feet of institutional use at the basement, first, second and third floors (d.b.a. Buddha’s Universal Church), and one 2,319 square foot dwelling unit (1,858 net square feet) at the fourth floor. The proposed institutional uses would connect to the adjacent property at 825 Kearny via a pedestrian bridge at the second floor, which would also provide access to the institution’s existing primary church building at 720 Washington Street. Many of the custom elements that exist at 720 Washington will be replicated in the proposed buildings, including custom balconies.

5. Public Comment. To date, the Department has received one call in support of the project. The

project sponsor has conducted extensive outreach, providing information about the project to over 40 neighborhood groups and area residents.

6. Planning Code Compliance: The Commission finds that the Project is consistent with the

relevant provisions of the Planning Code in the following manner:

A. Height. Pursuant to Planning Code Section 254, Conditional Use Authorization is required for any project exceeding 35 feet in height in the Chinatown Community Business District. The height of the project at the roof is 49 feet, ten inches, and the project also includes a clerestory which extends beyond the roof by three feet, four inches. The project includes a stair penthouse and elevator overrun, which are exempt from the height measurement. The project sponsor is seeking Conditional Use Authorization for the proposed height.

B. Bulk. The subject property is located within the “N” bulk district. Planning Code Section 270

states that for any portion of the building exceeding 40 feet in height, the maximum plan length is limited to 50 feet, and the diagonal dimension is limited to 100 feet. For projects seeking modifications to the bulk limitations of Section 270, the Planning Commission shall consider the following standards and criteria in addition to those set forth in Section 303(c): 1. The appearance of the bulk in the building, structure or development shall be reduced by

means of at least one and preferably a combination of the following factors, so as to produce the impression of an aggregate of parts rather than a single building mass:


4


i. Major variations in the planes of wall surfaces, in either depth or direction, that significantly alter the mass;

ii. Significant differences in heights of various portions of the building, structure, or development that divide the mass into distinct elements;

iii. Differences in materials, colors or scales of the facades that produce separate major elements;

iv. Compensation for those portions of the building, structure or development that may exceed the bulk limits by corresponding reduction of other portions below the maximum bulk permitted; and

v. In cases where two or more buildings, structures or towers are contained within a single development, a wide separation between such buildings, structures or towers.

2. In every case the building, structure or development shall be made compatible with the character and development of the surrounding area by means of all of the following factors;

i. A silhouette harmonious with natural land-forms and building patterns, including the patterns produced by height limits;

ii. Either maintenance of an overall height similar to that of surrounding development or a sensitive transition, where appropriate, to development of a dissimilar character;

iii. Use of materials, colors and scales either similar to or harmonizing with those of nearby development; and

iv. Preservation or enhancement of the pedestrian environment by maintenance of pleasant scale and visual interest.

3. While the above factors must be present to a considerable degree for any bulk limit to be exceeded, these factors must be present to a greater degree where both the maximum length and the maximum diagonal dimension are to be exceeded than where only one maximum dimension is to be exceeded.

The building reaches 40 feet in height at the fourth story, so the bulk limitations apply to the fourth story and above. The proposed diagonal dimension is 85 feet, 10 inches, which is compliant with the “N” bulk district controls of Planning Code Section 270. However, the proposed length of the fourth story is 80 feet, 11 inches, which exceeds the principally permitted length of 50 feet. The project sponsor is seeking Conditional Use Authorization to exceed the principally permitted bulk length per Planning Code Section 270. The project sponsor has incorporated several features into the design of the building to reduce the apparent bulk of the building and ensure it is consistent with the surrounding development. The project incorporates a six-foot setback at the front to reduce the visibility of the fourth floor and to allow for light and air to reach the sidewalk on Kearny Street. A custom balcony railing has been added along the front of the building to relate to the elaborate cornice on the property to the north. The sponsor has chosen a terra cotta rain screen system which will be scaled to the size of brick coursing to better relate to surrounding masonry buildings. The project will also provide an active ground floor retail space that is in keeping with the scale of other retail spaces in Chinatown.


5


C. Nonresidential Use Size. Pursuant to Planning Code Sections 121.4 and 810.20, the maximum nonresidential use size which is principally permitted in the Chinatown Community Business District is 5,000 square feet (excluding Restaurants).

The project proposes approximately 7,520 square feet of Institutional Use, which would allow the expansion of community gathering space for the congregation of Buddha’s Universal Church. The institutional uses would primarily be at the second and third floors, with access at the first floor and storage at the basement. The project sponsor is seeking a Conditional Use Authorization for the proposed Institutional use size.

D. Site Coverage Modification. Pursuant to Planning Code Section 134.1, site coverage shall be

no greater than 75% at the lowest level containing a dwelling unit. The remaining 25% of uncovered area may be provided in a location other than the rear yard if the new structure does not significantly impede the access light and air to adjacent properties, as determined by the Zoning Administrator.

The subject lot is approximately 107 feet, 11 inches deep. The lowest level containing a dwelling unit, the fourth story, is approximately 80 feet, 11 inches deep and covers 75% of lot area. The project proposes a six foot front setback and a 21 foot rear setback. The project sponsor is seeking a site coverage modification from the Zoning Administrator to provide six feet of the uncovered area in a location other than the rear yard. The Zoning Administrator will consider if the modified layout preserves light and air to existing windows in the vicinity, the usability of the uncovered space for residential open space purposes, and sun access to the uncovered space and adjacent sidewalks.

E. Ground Floor Ceiling Height. Section 145.1 of the Planning Code requires a minimum floor-

to-floor ceiling height of 14 feet for non-residential uses in Chinatown Mixed-Use Districts.

The project proposes a floor-to-floor height of 11 feet, ten inches at the ground level. In order for the project to feasibly connect to the adjacent buildings occupied by Buddha’s Universal Church, which would allow senior members of the congregation to move more fluidly through the Church and supportive spaces. The project sponsor is seeking a Variance from Planning Code Section 145.1.

F. Permitted Obstructions over Streets and Alleys. Planning Code Section 136(c)(2), includes

restrictions for balconies projecting over streets and alleys. Projections over the street are limited to three feet, and further limited to two feet where the sidewalk width is nine feet or less. The maximum length of each balcony is 15 feet at the property line, and is reduced to nine feet at a distance of three feet establishing the required open area. Balconies must be separated from interior lot lines at least two feet. The project proposes two 14 foot, eight inch balconies, one at the third floor and one at the fourth floor. These balconies do not comply with Section 136(c)(2), as the width of these balconies are not reduced to nine feet as they extend away from the property. Preservation staff and Design staff at the Department have reviewed these balconies and found them to be more consistent with the prevailing pattern of balconies in Chinatown. The project sponsor is seeking a Variance from Section 136 of the Planning Code.


6


G. Residential Density. Planning Code Section 207 allows for one residential unit per 200 square feet of lot area. The project proposes one dwelling unit on a 3,228 square foot lot, and is therefore complaint with the density controls of Planning Code Section 207.

H. Institutional Use. As defined in Section 890.50, Buddha’s Universal Church would be

considered an “Other Institution” within the Chinatown Community Business District. Institutional Uses are principally permitted within the Chinatown Community Business District.

I. Usable Open Space. Pursuant to Planning Code Section 135, 48 square feet of usable open

space is required per Residential Dwelling Unit. The project proposes 577 square feet of useable open space for the proposed dwelling unit, including 410 square feet of usable open space on a rear deck, as well as approximately 167 square feet of usable open space on a deck facing Kearny Street. The project is compliant with the usable open space provisions of the Planning Code.

J. Dwelling Unit Exposure. Section 140 requires that at least one room of all dwelling units face onto a public street at least 20 feet in width, a rear yard or other open area that meets minimum requirements for area and horizontal dimensions. The proposed dwelling unit faces onto Kearny Street, which is greater than 20 feet in width. The project is compliant with Dwelling Unit Exposure requirements of the Planning Code.

K. Bicycle Parking. Pursuant to Planning Code Section 155.2, one Class 1 bicycle parking space is required per Dwelling Unit. For lots with less than three Dwelling Units, no racks are required, but the applicant must provide secure, weather protected space at least two feet by six feet. For Religious Facilities, five Class 1 parking spaces are required for facilities with a capacity of less than 500 guests, and ten are required for those with a capacity greater than 500 guests. One Class 1 space is required for every 7,500 square feet of occupied floor area. Religious facilities also require one Class 2 bicycle parking space for every for every 500 seats or every portion of each 50 person capacity. A minimum of two Class 2 spaces is required for retail uses, as well as one Class 2 space for every 2,500 square feet of occupied floor area. No Class 2 spaces are required for lots with less than three Dwelling Units. The project includes one dwelling unit, 1,635 square feet of ground floor retail, and 7,520 square feet of institutional use with a capacity of 520 patrons. Therefore, the project requires one Class 1 space for residential uses, ten Class 1 spaces for Institutional uses, and no Class 1 spaces for the proposed retail. The project also requires one Class 2 bicycle parking space for institutional use, as well as two Class 2 spaces for the proposed retail uses. No Class 2 spaces are required for residential use. The project requires six total Class 1 spaces and three total Class 2 spaces. The applicant has proposed twelve secure Class 1 bicycle racks in the basement of the proposed building, as well as four Class 2 spaces on the sidewalk; therefore, the project is complaint with the bicycle parking requirements of Planning Code Section 155.2.


7


L. Floor Area Ratio. Pursuant to Planning Code Section 124, the Floor Area Ratio for the Chinatown Community Business District is 2.8 to 1, and does not apply to residential uses or institutional uses. The Floor Area Ratio of the proposed project primarily includes the area devoted to the ground floor commercial use, and is approximately 0.6 to 1.0. Therefore, the project is compliant with the Floor Area Ratio controls of Section 124.

M. Maximum Street Frontages in Chinatown. Pursuant to Planning Code Section 145.3, the

street frontage of a building in the Chinatown Community Business District shall not exceed 50 feet. The subject lot is approximately 30 feet wide, and the proposed building would be 27 feet, 11 inches wide. The project is complaint with Section 145.3 as the street frontage of the proposed building does not exceed 50 feet.

7. Planning Code Section 303 establishes criteria for the Planning Commission to consider when

reviewing applications for Conditional Use approval. On balance, the project does comply with said criteria in that:

A. The proposed new uses and building, at the size and intensity contemplated and at the

proposed location, will provide a development that is necessary or desirable, and compatible with, the neighborhood or the community.

The project is both necessary and desirable for the neighborhood, as it would allow a deeply rooted community institution to expand. The proposed institutional and residential uses at the property would allow Buddha’s Universal Church to expand their community gathering space, and to promote greater intergenerational interactions among their existing members and younger generations. The proposed dwelling unit would also allow the Church’s elders, who are senior citizens, within their congregational community as well as the larger Chinatown community. The proposed retail space would result in a more functional storefront and more active street frontage. The proposed building was designed to be compatible with the Chinatown Historic District as well as surrounding development.

B. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, convenience or general

welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. There are no features of the project that could be detrimental to the health, safety or convenience of those residing or working the area, in that:

i. Nature of proposed site, including its size and shape, and the proposed size, shape and

arrangement of structures;

The proposed building was designed to respect the size and massing of surrounding structures. The height of the building does not reach the maximum height allowable, or 65 feet, and the applicant has incorporated a six-foot setback at the front to reduce the impact of the fourth story on


8


light to the sidewalk. A 21 foot rear setback is also proposed to protect light, air, and the mid-block open space.

ii. The accessibility and traffic patterns for persons and vehicles, the type and volume of

such traffic, and the adequacy of proposed off-street parking and loading;

The Planning Code does not require parking or loading for the proposed uses. The project is designed to meet the needs of members of the existing church and residents of the surrounding neighborhood, and should not generate significant amounts of vehicular trips from the immediate neighborhood or citywide.

iii. The safeguards afforded to prevent noxious or offensive emissions such as noise, glare,

dust and odor;

No noxious or offensive emissions are anticipated as a result of the proposed residential, retail, or institutional uses.

iv. Treatment given, as appropriate, to such aspects as landscaping, screening, open spaces,

parking and loading areas, service areas, lighting and signs;

The project does not include any public open spaces, parking, loading, or service areas. Entries to the residential and institutional uses at upper floors have been screened using custom metal grates, similar to those that were handmade and incorporated into the original church building. Signage for any proposed tenants at the ground floor will be reviewed by Department staff when a tenant is proposed.

C. That the use as proposed will comply with the applicable provisions of the Planning Code

and will not adversely affect the General Plan.

The Project complies with all relevant requirements and standards of the Planning Code and is consistent with objectives and policies of the General Plan as detailed below.

D. That the use as proposed would provide development that is in conformity with the purpose

of the applicable Chinatown Community Business District.

The proposed project is consistent with the stated purposed of Chinatown Community Business District in that the intended use is located at the ground floor, will provide a compatible convenience service for the immediately surrounding neighborhoods during daytime hours.

8. General Plan Compliance. The Project is, on balance, consistent with the following Objectives

and Policies of the General Plan and the Chinatown Area Plan:

HOUSING Objectives and Policies

OBJECTIVE 4:


9


FOSTER A HOUSING STOCK THAT MEETS THE NEEDS OF ALL RESIDENTS ACROSS LIFECYCLES. Policy 4.3: Create housing for people with disabilities and aging adults by including universal design principles in new and rehabilitated housing units. The project creates one dwelling unit intended for occupancy by the elders of Buddha’s Universal Church. The project incorporates ADA accessible restrooms for each bedroom, as well as elevator access to the dwelling unit. Furthermore, the project proposes to create a pedestrian bridge at the second floor which would connect to Buddha’s Universal Church at the adjacent properties, allowing greater mobility between community spaces and living quarters for seniors and persons with disabilities. OBJECTIVE 11: SUPPORT AND RESPECT THE DIVERSE AND DISTINCT CHARACTER OF SAN FRANCISCO’S NEIGHBORHOODS. Policy 11.6: Foster a sense of community through architectural design, using features that foster community interaction. Policy 11.9: Foster development that strengthens local culture, sense of place, and history. Buddha’s Universal Church has been deeply rooted in the Chinatown community for decades, and the proposed expansion is aimed to attract a younger demographic to the Church to not only engage with the teachings of the Buddha, but to continue the legacy of a strong cultural fabric of Chinatown.

CHINATOWN AREA PLAN Objectives and Policies

OBJECTIVE 1: PRESERVE THE DISTINCTIVE URBAN CHARACTER, PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND CULTURAL HERITAGE OF CHINATOWN. Policy 1.2: Promote a building form that harmonizes with the scale of existing buildings and width of Chinatown’s streets. The proposed project has been designed to respect the scale of the surrounding development and to relate to adjacent buildings. The first three stories of massing are in keeping with the height and bulk of the surrounding two- and three-story development. The proposed fourth story is set back from the front property line six feet, and incorporates a balcony that is aligned with the cornice on the adjacent property to the north. OBJECTIVE 3:


10


STABILIZE AND WHERE POSSIBLE INCREASE THE SUPPLY OF HOUSING. Policy 3.2: Increase the supply of housing.

The project proposes one dwelling unit at the fourth story, which increases the supply of housing on the site by one dwelling unit.

OBJECTIVE 6: RETAIN CHINATOWN’S ROLE AS A CAPITAL CITY. Policy 6.1: Provide incentives for location and expansion of institutions and cultural facilities.

The project would allow the expansion of a deeply rooted religious facility while also removing blight and constructing a building that is in keeping with the character of existing development in Chinatown.

9. Planning Code Section 101.1(b) establishes eight priority-planning policies and requires review

of permits for consistency with said policies. On balance, the project does comply with said policies in that:

A. That existing neighborhood-serving retail uses be preserved and enhanced and future

opportunities for resident employment in and ownership of such businesses be enhanced.

The project would remove a vacant, two-story commercial building that is currently not occupied by any neighborhood-serving retail. The project will replace this commercial building with ground floor retail space, preserving the opportunity for neighborhood-serving retail to be located at the subject property.

B. That existing housing and neighborhood character be conserved and protected in order to

preserve the cultural and economic diversity of our neighborhoods.

The project has been designed in a manner to respect the surrounding development, and incorporates modern interpretations of design features commonly seen in Chinatown. The uses proposed by the project will preserve cultural and economic diversity by allowing the expansion of a cultural institution and by promoting intergenerational interactions within the Chinatown community.

C. That the City's supply of affordable housing be preserved and enhanced,

The project provides one dwelling unit that is intended to house senior members of the Buddha’s Universal Church community. Although the project is not subject to the Inclusionary Housing requirements of Planning Code Section 415, providing a dwelling unit specifically for seniors will incrementally reduce the demand for senior housing elsewhere in Chinatown.

D. That commuter traffic not impede MUNI transit service or overburden our streets or

neighborhood parking.


11


The site is on Kearny Street and is well served by both local and regional transit. The uses proposed are intended to meet the needs of the surrounding neighborhood, and substantial commuter traffic is not anticipated.

E. That a diverse economic base be maintained by protecting our industrial and service sectors

from displacement due to commercial office development, and that future opportunities for resident employment and ownership in these sectors be enhanced.

The Project will not displace any service or industry establishment. The project will not affect industrial or service sector uses or related employment opportunities. Ownership of industrial or service sector businesses will not be affected by this project.

F. That the City achieve the greatest possible preparedness to protect against injury and loss of

life in an earthquake.

The Project is designed and will be constructed to conform to the structural and seismic safety requirements of the City Building Code. This proposal will not impact the property’s ability to withstand an earthquake.

G. That landmarks and historic buildings be preserved.

The project proposes the demolition of a non-contributing building within the Chinatown Historic District. Preservation staff has found that the demolition and new construction would not have an adverse impact on the District. The replacement building has been reviewed by preservation staff at the Department to ensure that the design is compatible with the surrounding Chinatown Historic District.

H. That our parks and open space and their access to sunlight and vistas be protected from

development.

The project will have no negative impact on existing parks and open spaces. The Project does not have an impact on open spaces.

10. The Project is consistent with and would promote the general and specific purposes of the Code

provided under Section 101.1(b) in that, as designed, the Project would contribute to the character and stability of the neighborhood and would constitute a beneficial development.

11. The Commission hereby finds that approval of the Conditional Use authorization would promote

the health, safety and welfare of the City.


12


DECISION That based upon the Record, the submissions by the Applicant, the staff of the Department and other interested parties, the oral testimony presented to this Commission at the public hearings, and all other written materials submitted by all parties, the Commission hereby APPROVES Conditional Use Application No. 2014.0401CUA subject to the following conditions attached hereto as “EXHIBIT A” in general conformance with plans on file, dated November 28, 2016, and stamped “EXHIBIT B”, which is incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth. APPEAL AND EFFECTIVE DATE OF MOTION: Any aggrieved person may appeal this Conditional Use Authorization to the Board of Supervisors within thirty (30) days after the date of this Motion No. XXXXX. The effective date of this Motion shall be the date of this Motion if not appealed (After the 30-day period has expired) OR the date of the decision of the Board of Supervisors if appealed to the Board of Supervisors. For further information, please contact the Board of Supervisors at (415) 554-5184, City Hall, Room 244, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco, CA 94102. Protest of Fee or Exaction: You may protest any fee or exaction subject to Government Code Section 66000 that is imposed as a condition of approval by following the procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020. The protest must satisfy the requirements of Government Code Section 66020(a) and must be filed within 90 days of the date of the first approval or conditional approval of the development referencing the challenged fee or exaction. For purposes of Government Code Section 66020, the date of imposition of the fee shall be the date of the earliest discretionary approval by the City of the subject development. If the City has not previously given Notice of an earlier discretionary approval of the project, the Planning Commission’s adoption of this Motion, Resolution, Discretionary Review Action or the Zoning Administrator’s Variance Decision Letter constitutes the approval or conditional approval of the development and the City hereby gives NOTICE that the 90-day protest period under Government Code Section 66020 has begun. If the City has already given Notice that the 90-day approval period has begun for the subject development, then this document does not re-commence the 90-day approval period. I hereby certify that the Planning Commission ADOPTED the foregoing Motion on December 8, 2016. Jonas P. Ionin Commission Secretary AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ADOPTED: December 8, 2016


13


EXHIBIT A AUTHORIZATION This authorization is for a conditional use to allow construction of a building exceeding 35 feet in height, to exceed the permitted bulk length, and to establish a use size exceeding 5,000 square feet (d.b.a. Buddha’s Universal Church) located at 827-829 Kearny Street pursuant to Planning Code Section(s) 121.4, 254, 270 and 303 within the Chinatown Community Business District and a 65-N Height and Bulk District; in general conformance with plans, dated November 28, 2016, and stamped “EXHIBIT B” included in the docket for Case No. 2014.0401CUA and subject to conditions of approval reviewed and approved by the Commission on December 8, 2016 under Motion No XXXXXX. This authorization and the conditions contained herein run with the property and not with a particular Project Sponsor, business, or operator. RECORDATION OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Prior to the issuance of the building permit or commencement of use for the Project the Zoning Administrator shall approve and order the recordation of a Notice in the Official Records of the Recorder of the City and County of San Francisco for the subject property. This Notice shall state that the project is subject to the conditions of approval contained herein and reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on XXXXXX under Motion No XXXXXX. PRINTING OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL ON PLANS The conditions of approval under the 'Exhibit A' of this Planning Commission Motion No. XXXXXX shall be reproduced on the Index Sheet of construction plans submitted with the Site or Building permit application for the Project. The Index Sheet of the construction plans shall reference to the Conditional Use authorization and any subsequent amendments or modifications. SEVERABILITY The Project shall comply with all applicable City codes and requirements. If any clause, sentence, section or any part of these conditions of approval is for any reason held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect or impair other remaining clauses, sentences, or sections of these conditions. This decision conveys no right to construct, or to receive a building permit. “Project Sponsor” shall include any subsequent responsible party. CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS Changes to the approved plans may be approved administratively by the Zoning Administrator. Significant changes and modifications of conditions shall require Planning Commission approval of a new Conditional Use authorization.


14


Conditions of Approval, Compliance, Monitoring, and Reporting PERFORMANCE

1. Validity. The authorization and right vested by virtue of this action is valid for three (3) years from the effective date of the Motion. The Department of Building Inspection shall have issued a Building Permit or Site Permit to construct the project and/or commence the approved use within this three-year period. For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

2. Expiration and Renewal. Should a Building or Site Permit be sought after the three (3) year

period has lapsed, the project sponsor must seek a renewal of this Authorization by filing an application for an amendment to the original Authorization or a new application for Authorization. Should the project sponsor decline to so file, and decline to withdraw the permit application, the Commission shall conduct a public hearing in order to consider the revocation of the Authorization. Should the Commission not revoke the Authorization following the closure of the public hearing, the Commission shall determine the extension of time for the continued validity of the Authorization. For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

3. Diligent pursuit. Once a site or Building Permit has been issued, construction must commence

within the timeframe required by the Department of Building Inspection and be continued diligently to completion. Failure to do so shall be grounds for the Commission to consider revoking the approval if more than three (3) years have passed since this Authorization was approved. For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

4. Extension. All time limits in the preceding three paragraphs may be extended at the discretion of

the Zoning Administrator where implementation of the project is delayed by a public agency, an appeal or a legal challenge and only by the length of time for which such public agency, appeal or challenge has caused delay. For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

5. Conformity with Current Law. No application for Building Permit, Site Permit, or other

entitlement shall be approved unless it complies with all applicable provisions of City Codes in effect at the time of such approval. For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

6. Additional Project Authorization. The Project Sponsor must obtain a Variance from Planning Code Section 136 and Section 145.1, as well as a Site Coverage Modification per Planning Code Section 134.1, and satisfy all the conditions thereof. The conditions set forth below are additional conditions required in connection with the Project. If these conditions overlap with any other

http://www.sf-planning.org/






15


requirement imposed on the Project, the more restrictive or protective condition or requirement, as determined by the Zoning Administrator, shall apply. For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

DESIGN – COMPLIANCE AT PLAN STAGE

1. Final Materials. The Project Sponsor shall continue to work with Planning Department on the building design. Final materials, glazing, color, texture, landscaping, and detailing shall be subject to Department staff review and approval. The architectural addenda shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to issuance. For information about compliance, contact the Case Planner, Planning Department at 415-558-6378, www.sf-planning.org

2. Garbage, composting and recycling storage. Space for the collection and storage of garbage,

composting, and recycling shall be provided within enclosed areas on the property and clearly labeled and illustrated on the building permit plans. Space for the collection and storage of recyclable and compostable materials that meets the size, location, accessibility and other standards specified by the San Francisco Recycling Program shall be provided at the ground level of the buildings. For information about compliance, contact the Case Planner, Planning Department at 415-558-6378, www.sf-planning.org

7. Transformer Vault. The location of individual project PG&E Transformer Vault installations has significant effects to San Francisco streetscapes when improperly located. However, they may not have any impact if they are installed in preferred locations. Therefore, the Planning Department recommends the following preference schedule in locating new transformer vaults, in order of most to least desirable:

a. On-site, in a basement area accessed via a garage or other access point without use of separate doors on a ground floor façade facing a public right-of-way;

b. On-site, in a driveway, underground; c. On-site, above ground, screened from view, other than a ground floor façade facing a

public right-of-way; d. Public right-of-way, underground, under sidewalks with a minimum width of 12 feet,

avoiding effects on streetscape elements, such as street trees; and based on Better Streets Plan guidelines;

e. Public right-of-way, underground; and based on Better Streets Plan guidelines; f. Public right-of-way, above ground, screened from view; and based on Better Streets Plan

guidelines; g. On-site, in a ground floor façade (the least desirable location).

Unless otherwise specified by the Planning Department, Department of Public Work’s Bureau of Street Use and Mapping (DPW BSM) should use this preference schedule for all new transformer vault installation requests. For information about compliance, contact Bureau of Street Use and Mapping, Department of Public Works at 415-554-5810, http://sfdpw.org




http://sfdpw.org/


16


PARKING AND TRAFFIC

8. Bicycle Parking Pursuant to Planning Code Sections 155.1, 155.4, and 155.5, the Project shall provide no fewer than 14 bicycle parking spaces (eleven Class 1 spaces for the residential and institutional portions of the Project and three Class 2 spaces for the commercial portion of the Project). For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

PROVISIONS

9. Transportation Sustainability Fee. The Project is subject to the Transportation Sustainability Fee (TSF), as applicable, pursuant to Planning Code Section 411A. For information about compliance, contact the Case Planner, Planning Department at 415-558-6378, www.sf-planning.org

10. Child Care Fee - Residential. The Project is subject to the Residential Child Care Fee, as applicable, pursuant to Planning Code Section 414A. For information about compliance, contact the Case Planner, Planning Department at 415-558-6378, www.sf-planning.org

MONITORING

11. Enforcement. Violation of any of the Planning Department conditions of approval contained in this Motion or of any other provisions of Planning Code applicable to this Project shall be subject to the enforcement procedures and administrative penalties set forth under Planning Code Section 176 or Section 176.1. The Planning Department may also refer the violation complaints to other city departments and agencies for appropriate enforcement action under their jurisdiction. For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

12. Revocation due to Violation of Conditions. Should implementation of this Project result in

complaints from interested property owners, residents, or commercial lessees which are not resolved by the Project Sponsor and found to be in violation of the Planning Code and/or the specific conditions of approval for the Project as set forth in Exhibit A of this Motion, the Zoning Administrator shall refer such complaints to the Commission, after which it may hold a public hearing on the matter to consider revocation of this authorization. For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

OPERATION

13. Garbage, Recycling, and Composting Receptacles. Garbage, recycling, and compost containers shall be kept within the premises and hidden from public view, and placed outside only when being serviced by the disposal company. Trash shall be contained and disposed of pursuant to garbage and recycling receptacles guidelines set forth by the Department of Public Works.







17


For information about compliance, contact Bureau of Street Use and Mapping, Department of Public Works at 415-554-.5810, http://sfdpw.org

14. Sidewalk Maintenance. The Project Sponsor shall maintain the main entrance to the building

and all sidewalks abutting the subject property in a clean and sanitary condition in compliance with the Department of Public Works Streets and Sidewalk Maintenance Standards. For information about compliance, contact Bureau of Street Use and Mapping, Department of Public Works, 415-695-2017, http://sfdpw.org

15. Community Liaison. Prior to issuance of a building permit to construct the project and

implement the approved use, the Project Sponsor shall appoint a community liaison officer to deal with the issues of concern to owners and occupants of nearby properties. The Project Sponsor shall provide the Zoning Administrator with written notice of the name, business address, and telephone number of the community liaison. Should the contact information change, the Zoning Administrator shall be made aware of such change. The community liaison shall report to the Zoning Administrator what issues, if any, are of concern to the community and what issues have not been resolved by the Project Sponsor. For information about compliance, contact Code Enforcement, Planning Department at 415-575-6863, www.sf-planning.org

http://sfdpw.org/

http://sfdpw.org/


Parcel Map

Conditional Use Authorization Hearing Case Number 2014.0401CUAVAR Buddha’s Universal Church 827-829 Kearny Street

SUBJECT PROPERTY

*The Sanborn Maps in San Francisco have not been updated since 1998, and this map may not accurately reflect existing conditions.

Sanborn Map*


SUBJECT PROPERTY

Aerial Photo


SUBJECT PROPERTY

Zoning Map


SUBJECT PROPERTY

Site Photo


~~~~o couNr~oN

ci Y ̀̂ `"'., tir a

°~~ds . ~a~5~~

SAN FRANCISCOPLQNIVING Q~EPARTMENT

Certificate of DeterminationExemption from Environmental Review

Case No.:

Project Title:

Zoning:

Block/Lot:

2014-002030ENV

827-829 Keamy Street

CCB (Chinatown-Community Business) Use District

65-N Height and Bulk District

0194/004

Lot Size: 3,227 square feet

Project Sponsor: Ralph Marchese, T'he Marchese Company

415-567-9872

Staff Contact: Justin Horner — (415) 575-9023

Justin. Horner@sfgo v. org

PROJECT DESCRIPTION:

1650 Mission StSuite 400San Francisco,CA 94103-2479

Reception:4y 5.558.6378

Fax:415.S5B.6409

PlanningIr~formati~:415.558.6377

The project site is located on a block bounded by Kearny Street to the east, Wentworth Place to the west,

Washington Street to the south and Jackson Street to the north.

T'he proposed project would demolish an existing 5,975-square-foot, 2-story-over-basement commercial

building built in 1922, and construct an approximately 11,800-square-foot, 4-story-over-basement, 49'10"-

foot-tall mixed use building (56 feet tall with stair and elevator penthouses). The proposed new building

would include 7,791 sf of institutional space associated with the Buddha's Universal Church, 1,632 sf of

ground-floor retail, and 2,321 sf of residential uses in a single three-bedroom unit. 'The proposed project

includes no off-street parking and seven bicycle parking spaces on the basement level. Proposed

construction would result in the excavation of an existing 11-foot-deep partial basement for an additional

four feet, to a total depth of approximately fifteen feet below ground surface, resulting in 650 cubic yards

of exported soil. Construction would last approximately 16 months.

(Continued on next page)

EXEMPT STATUS:

Categorical Exemption, Class 32 (California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] Guidelines Section

15332). See page 3.

DETERMINATION:

I do hereby certify that the above determination has been made pursuant to State and local requirements.

Lisa M. Gibson

Acting Environmental Review Officer

1 ~~Date

Exemption from Environmental Review

cc: Ralph Marcese, Project Sponsor

Carly Grob, Current Planner

Justin Greying ,Preservation Planner

Supervisor Peskin, District 3, (via Clerk of the Board)

Distribution List

Virna Byrd, M.D.F.

Case No. 2014-002030ENV

827-829 Kearny Street

SAN fPaNCI5C0t+LANN~O QEPARTIMEHT

Exemption from Environmental Review

PROJECT DESCRIPTION (continued):

Project Approvals

Conditional Use Authorization.

Case No. 2014-002030ENV


a) Principally Permitted Use (Section 810.20): Conditional Use Authorization is required for the

proposed institutional use as it exceeds the principally permitted use size of 5,000 square feet.

b) Bulk (Section 270): The proposed project is located in the 65-N Height and Bulk District.

Deviations from the bulk limits outlined in the Code Section require Conditional Use

Authorization by the Planning Commission.

c) Height (Section 810.10): Conditional Use Authorization is required as the height of the

proposed project exceeds 35 feet in the Chinatown Community Business District.

Variances.

a) Obstructions Over Streets and Alleys (Section 136): The proposed project includes balconies that

exceed the permitted dimensions for obstructions over streets and allies.

b) Ground Floor Ceiling Height (Section 145.1 (c)(4)): 'The proposed project includes a ground floor

ceiling height that does not meet the minimum required 14-foot ground floor ceiling height.

c) Rear Yard (Section 134): The proposed project includes a rear yard modification to provide a

portion of the uncovered area of the rear yard on the front balcony.

A Building Permit issued by the Department of Building Inspection.

Approval Action: The issuance of a Conditional Use Authorization by the Plaruung Commission is the

Approval Action for the project. The Approval Action date establishes the start of the 30-day appeal

period for this CEQA exemption determination pursuant to Section 31.04(h) of the San Francisco

Administrative Code.

EXEMPT STATUS (continued:

CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, or Class 32, provides an exemption from environmental review for in-fill

development projects that meet the following conditions. As discussed below, the proposed project

satisfies the terms of the Class 32 exemption.

a) The project is consistent with applicable general plan designations and policies as well as with applicable zoning

designations.

The San Francisco General Plan, which provides general policies and objectives to guide land use

decisions, contains some policies that relate to physical environmental issues. The proposed

project would not obviously or substantially conflict with any such policy, and would be

consistent with the San Francisco General Pian and with applicable zoning designations. The site

is located within the CCB (Chinatown Community--Business) Use District, which is intended to

protect existing housing, encourage new housing and to accommodate modest expansion of

Chinatown business activities as well as street-level retail uses. Thus, the proposed project, which

would add one residential unit to a commercial site, and would include expansion of an activity

SAN FAANCISCDPiANNINO QEPARTMENT

Exemption from Environmental Review Case No. 2014-002030ENV


permitted within the Use District (namely, a Religious Facility), is consistent with all General

Plan designations and applicable zoning plans and policies.

b) The development occurs within city limits on a site of less than five acres surrounded b~ urban uses.

The 3,227-square-foot (0.08-acre) project site is located within a fully developed area of San Francisco.

The surrounding uses are mixed-use residential over retail and commercial, institutional uses (such

as the Buddha's Universal Church itself, St Mary's School, and a campus of the City College of San

Francisco). Thus, the proposed project would be properly characterized as an infill development

surrounded by urban uses on a site of less than five acres.

c) The project site has no habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

The 3,227-square-foot project site is located within a developed urban area and is fully occupied by

existing development. The project site has no value as habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered

species.

d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water

quality.

Transportation

On March 3, 2016, in anticipation of the future certification of revised CEQA Guidelines pursuant to

Senate Bill 743, the San Francisco Planning Commission adopted State Office of Planning and

Research's recommendation in the Revised Proposal on Updates to the CEQA Guidelines on Evaluating

Transportation Impacts in CEQA1 to use the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) metric instead of

automobile delay to evaluate the transportation impacts of projects (Resolution 19579). (Note: the

VM'T metric does not apply to the analysis of impacts on non-automobile modes of travel such as

riding transit, walking, and bicycling.) Accordingly, this categorical exemption does not contain a

separate discussion of automobile delay (i.e., traffic) impacts. Instead, a VMT and induced

automobile travel impact analysis is provided within.

A project would have a significant effect on the environment if it would cause substantial additional

VMT. OPR's Proposed Transportation Impact Guidelines recommend screening criteria to identify

types, characteristics, or locations of projects that would not result in significant impacts to VMT. If a

project meets one of the three screening criteria provided (Map-Based Screening, Small Projects, and

Proximity to Transit Stations), then it is presumed that VMT impacts would be less than significant

for the project and a detailed VMT analysis is not required. Map-Based Screening is used to

determine if a project site is located within a transportation analysis zone (TAZ) that exhibits low

levels of VMTz; Small Projects are projects that would generate fewer than 100 vehicle trips per day;

' This document is available online at: htt~s://www.o~r.ca.gov/s sb743.php.

z A project would cause substantial additional VMT if it exceeds both the existing City household VMT per capita minus 15 percent

and existing regional household VMT per capita minus 15 percent. In San Francisco, the City's average VMT per capita is lower (8.4)

than the regional average (17.2). Therefore, the City average is irrelevant for the purposes of the analysis. For retail projects, thePlanning Department uses a VMT efficiency metric approach, and a project would generate substantial additional VMT if it exceeds

the regional VMT per retail employee minus 15 percent.

4

SAH FRANCISGOPLAHNIMO QEP'ARTMENT



and the Prouimity to Transit Stations criterion includes projects that are within a half mile of an

existing major transit stop, have a floor area ratio of greater than or equal to 0.75, vehicle parking that

is less than or equal to that required or allowed by the Planning Code without Conditional Use

authorization, and are consistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy.

For residential development, the existing regional average daily VMT per capita is 17.2.3 For retail

development, regional average daily retail VMT per employee is 14.9.4 Average daily VMT for these

land uses is projected to decrease in future 2040 cumulative conditions. Refer to Table 1: Daily

Vehicle Miles Traveled, which includes the TAZ in which the project site is located, 792.

As shown in Table 1, the proposed project's residential and retail uses would be located in a TAZ

where euisting VMT for residential and retail uses are more than 15 percent below regional averages.s

The existing average daily household VMT per capita is 3.0 for TAZ 792, which is 82 percent below

the existing regional average daily VMT per capita of 17.2. Future 2040 average daily household VMT

per capita is 2.6 for TAZ 792, which is 83 percent below the future 2040 regional average daily VM'T

per capita of 16.1. For the ground floor retail use and the proposed religious institutional use, the

Planning Department counts both as retail for the purposes of transportation analysis. The existing

average daily VMT per retail employee is 8.1 for TAZ 792, which is 45 percent below the existing

regional average daily VMT per retail employee of 14.9. Future 2040 average daily VMT per retail

employee is 7.5 for TAZ 792, which is 52 percent below the future 2040 regional average daily work-

related VMT per retail employee of 14.6.

Table 1: Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled

Existing Cumulative 2040

Bay Area Bay Area

Land Use Bav Area Regional Bav Area Regional

Regional Averase TAZ 792 Regional Average TAZ 792

Averaee minus Avera e minus

15°/a 15%

Households17.2 14.6 3.0 16.1 13.7 2.6

(Residential)

Employment

(Retail and 14.9 12.6 8.1 14.6 12.4 7.5Religious

Institutional)

3 Includes the VMT generated by the households in the development and averaged across the household population to determine

VMT per capita.

4 Retail travel is not explicitly captured in SF-CHAMP, rather, there is a generic "Other" purpose which includes retail shopping,

medical appointments, visiting friends or family, and al] other non-work, non-school tours. T'he retail efficiency metric captures all

of the "Other purpose travel generated by Bay Area households. The denominator of employment (including retail; cultural,

institutional, and educational; and medical employment; school enrollment, and number of households) represents the size, or

attraction, of the zone for this type of "Othef' purpose travel.

5 San Francisco Planning Department, Eligibility Checklist: CEQA Section 21099 —Modernization of Transportation Analysis for 827-829

Kearny Street, September 29, 2016. This document, and other cited documents, are available for review at the San Francisco Planning

Department, 1650 Mission Street, Suite 400 as part of Case File No. 2014.002030ENV.

5

SAN FRANCISCOPLANNIN[i DEPARTMEFIT



Given the project site is located in an area where existing VMT is more than 15 percent below the

existing regional average, the proposed project's residential and retail uses would not result in

substanrial additional VMT, and the proposed project would not result in a si~ificant impact related

to VMT. Furthermore, the project site meets both the Small Project and Proximity to Transit Stations

screening criteria, which also indicates that the proposed project's residential and retail uses would

not cause substantial additional VMT.6

Induced Automobile Travel Analysis. A project would have a significant effect on the environment if it

would substantially induce additional automobile travel by increasing physical roadway capacity in

congested areas (i.e., by adding new mixed-flow lanes) or by adding new roadways to the network.OPR's Proposed Transportation Impact Guidelines includes a list of transportation project types that

would not likely lead to a substantial or measureable increase in VMT. If a project fits within thegeneral types of projects (including combinations of types), then it is presumed that VMT impacts

would be less than significant and a detailed VMT analysis is not required.

The proposed project is not a transportation project and does not include features that would alter the

transportation network. The project therefore fits within the general types of projects that would not

substantially induce automobile travel, and the impacts would be less than significant.

Trip Generation. Localized trip generation of the proposed project was calculated using atrip-based

analysis and information in the 2002 Transportation Impacts Analysis Guidelines for Environmental

Review (SF Guidelines) developed by the San Francisco Planning Department.e The proposed project

would generate an estimated 117 person trips (inbound and outbound) on PM peak-hour basis,

consisting of 42 person trips by auto (18 vehicle trips accounting for vehicle occupancy date for thisCensus Tract), 20 transit trips, 41 walk trips and 14 trips by other modes. These trip generation

estimates are conservative, as the primary use of the proposed project--religious institutional--istreated as a retail use for the purposes of trip generation estimation. It is not anticipated that

religious institutional uses would have the same daily trip generation every day of the week, as

services are held at set days and times of the week.

Transit. 'The project site is well served by public transportation. Within aquarter-mile of the project

site, the San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni) operates the following bus lines: 1, 8, 8AX, 8BX, 10,12, 30, 30X, 41, 45, 82X, and 91X. The proposed project would be expected to generate 223 daily

transit trips, including 20 transit trips during the p.m. peak hour. Given the wide availability ofnearby transit, the addition of 20 p.m. peak-hour transit trips would be accommodated by existing

capacity. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in unacceptable levels of transit service or

cause an increase in transit delays or operating costs such that significant adverse impacts to transit

service would result.

Noise. An approximate .doubling of traffic volumes in the project area would be necessary to

produce an increase in ambient noise levels noticeable to most people. The proposed project would

not cause a doubling in traffic volumes with the addition of one new dwelling unit, 1,632 square feetof ground floor retail and 7,791 square feet of institutional uses on the project site. The project's

increase to the existing traffic volumes would not cause a noticeable increase in the ambient noise

6 Ibid.~ Ibid.

e San Francisco Planning Department, Transportation Calculations for 827-829 Kearny Street, September 2016.r

SAN Fr~r'~NCI9C4iPI.ANNEPEO Q£RwRTMEOiT



level in the project vicinity. The noise generated by the operations of the proposed residential,

institutional and retail uses would be considered common and generally acceptable in an urban area,

and would not be considered a significant impact.

Section 2909 of the Noise Ordinance establishes a noise limit from mechanical sources, such as

building equipment, specified as a certain noise level in excess of the ambient noise level at the

property line: for noise generated by residential uses, the source must not cause a noise level more

than 5 dBA in excess of ambient noise levels; and for noise generated by commercial uses, the limit is

8 dBA in excess of ambient noise levels. In addition, the Noise Ordinance provides for a separate

fixed-source noise limit for residential interiors of 45 dBA at night (from 10:00 p.m. until 7:00 a.m.)

and 55 dBA during the day and evening hours (from 7:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m.). All of these

regulations are applicable to the proposed project. Therefore, noise impacts due to project operations

would be less-than-significant.

During project construction, all diesel and gasoline-powered engines would be equipped with noise-

arresting mufflers. Delivery truck trips and construction equipment would generate noise that thatmay be considered an annoyance by occupants of nearby properties. Construction noise is regulated

by the San Francisco Noise Ordinance (Article 29 of the City Police Code). Section 2907 of the Police

Code requires that noise levels from individual pieces of construcrion equipment, other than impact

tools, not exceed 80 A-weighted dBA at a distance of 100 feet from the source. Impact tools (such as

jackhammers and impact wrenches) must have both intake and exhaust muffled to the satisfaction of

the Director of Public Works. Section 2908 of the Police Code prohibits construction work between

8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. if the construction noise would exceed the ambient noise level by 5 dBA at the

project property line, unless a special permit is authorized by the Director of Public Works.

Construction noise impacts related to the project would be temporary and intermittent in nature.

Considering the above, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact with respect to

noise.

Air Quality. In accordance with the state and federal Clean Air Acts, air pollutant standards are

identified for the following six criteria air pollutants: ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), particulate

matter (PM), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dio~cide (S02) and lead. These air pollutants are termed

criteria air pollutants because they are regulated by developing specific public health- and welfare-

based criteria as the basis for setting permissible levels. The Bay Area Air Quality Management

District (BAAQMD) in their CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (May 2011), has developed screening

criteria to determine if projects would violate an air quality standard, contribute substantially to an

air quality violation, or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in criteria air pollutants

within the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. If a proposed project meets the screening criteria, then

the project would result in less-than-significant criteria air pollutant impacts. A project that exceeds

the screening criteria may require a detailed air quality assessment to determine whether criteria air

pollutant emissions would exceed significance thresholds. The proposed project, which involves less

than 10,000 cubic yards of excavation and the construction of 1 dwelling unit, 1,632 square feet of

ground floor retail and 7,791 square feet of institutional uses and 700 square feet would not exceed

criteria air pollutant screening levels for operation or construction.9

In addition to criteria air pollutants, individual projects may emit toxic air contaminants (TACs).

TACs collectively refer to a diverse group of air pollutants that are capable of causing chronic (i.e., of

long-duration) and acute (i.e., severe but short-term) adverse effects to human health, including

9 Bay Area Air Quality Management District, CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, Updated May 2011. Table 3-1.

7

SAN FNANCISC6PLANNINQ DEPARTINEHT



carcinogenic effects. In response to growing concerns of TACs and their human health effects, the San

Francisco Board of Supervisors approved a series of amendments to the San Francisco Building and

Health Codes, generally referred to as the Enhanced Ventilation Required for Urban Infill Sensitive

Use Developments or Health Code, Article 38 (Ordinance 224-14, effective December 8, 2014) (Article

38). The purpose of Article 38 is to protect the public health and welfare by establishing an Air

Pollutant Exposure Zone and imposing an enhanced ventilation requirement for all urban infill

sensitive use development within the Air Pollutant Exposure Zone. The proposed project is not

within an Air Pollutant Exposure Zone. Construction emissions would be temporary and variable in

nature and would not be expected to expose sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutants.

Furthermore, the proposed project would be subject to, and comply with, California regulations

limiting idling to no more than five minutes,l~ which would further reduce nearby sensitive

receptors' exposure to temporary and variable TAC emissions. Therefore, the proposed project's

construction period TAC emissions would not result in a significant impact with respect to exposing

sensitive receptors to substantial levels of air pollution.

In addition, San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved amendments to the San Francisco Building

and Health Codes, referred to as the Construction Dust Control Ordinance (Ordinance No. 176-08,

effective August 29, 2008). T'he intent of the Construction Dust Control Ordinance is to reduce the

quantity of fugitive dust generated during site preparation, demolition, and construction work in

order to protect the health of the general public and of on-site workers, minimize public nuisance

complaints, and to avoid orders to stop work by the Department of Building Inspection (DBI).

Project-related construction activities would result in construction dust, primarily from ground-

disturbing activities. In compliance with the Construction Dust Control Ordinance, the project

sponsor and contractor responsible for construction activities at the project site would be required to

control construction dust on the site through a combination of watering disturbed areas, covering

stockpiled materials, sweeping streets and sidewalks, and other measures. T'he regulations and

procedures set forth in the Construction Dust Control Ordinance would ensure that project-related

construction dust impacts would not be significant.

In conclusion, the proposed project would not result in significant air quality impacts.

Water Quality. T'he proposed project would not generate wastewater or result in wastewater

discharges that would have the potential to degrade water quality or contaminate a public water

supply. Project-related wastewater and storm water would flow to San Francisco's combined sewer

system and would be treated to standards contained in San Francisco's National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System Permit for the Southeast Water Pollution Control Plant prior to discharge. In

2013, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) adopted the Constnzction Site Runoff

Ordinance (Public Works Code, Ordinance 260-13) which requires construction sites that disturb

5,000 square feet or more of ground surface, such as the proposed project, to apply for a Construction

Site Runoff Control Permit from the SFPUC and submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, which

includes BMPs to prevent starmwater runoff and soil erosion during construction. Therefore, the

proposed project would not result in significant water quality impacts.

e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

to California Code of Regulations, Title 13, Division 3, § 2485 (on-road) and § 2449(d)(2) (off-road).._

8

SAN FRANCISGOPLANNiP►d tl~P/►Rl'1YlLIVIT


827-829 Keamy Street

The project site is located in a dense urban area where all public services and facilities are

available; no expansion of public services or utilities is anticipated. Therefore, the proposed

project would not result in adverse impacts related to utilities and public services.

DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES:

CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 establishes exceptions to the application of a categorical exemption for

a project. None of the established exceptions applies to the proposed project.

Guidelines Section 15300.2, subdivision (b), provides that a categorical exemption shall not be used where

the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time, is significant.

As discussed below under "Cumulative Impacts," there is no possibility of a significant cumulative effect

on the environment due to the proposed project.

Guidelines Section 15300.2, subdivision (c), provides that a categorical exemption shall not be used for an

activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the

environment due to unusual circumstances. As discussed above, the proposed project would not have a

significant effect on traffic, noise, air quality and water quality. In addition, the proposed project would

not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances for other environmental

topics, including those discussed below.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2, subdivision (~, provides that a categorical exemption shall not be used

for a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. For

the reasons discussed below under "Historic Architectural Resources," there is no possibility that the

proposed project would have a significant effect on a historic resource.

Historic Architectural Resources. The project site is currently occupied by a two-story wood-framecommercial building built in 1922. T'he building was previously identified as being eligible for listing inthe California Register of Historical Resources as anon-contributor to the Chinatown Historic Districtunder Criterion A (events) for its role in the development of the San Francisco Chinatown communityand under Criterion C (design/construction) for its distinctive use of "Chinese and Western design

elements." 11 Character-defining features of the Chinatown Historic District include continuous facadeson the street level, buildings of mostly two to three stories in height, tall ground floors, recessed entriesflanked by shop windows, tall, narrow and evenly spaces windows, hand-painted silage, brick masonry

construction and balconies, some with decorative Chinese-motif railings.

As the proposed project includes the demolition of a building eligible for listing as anon-contributor and

new construction within the adopted Chinatown Historic District, a Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE)was required to make a final determination as to the building's status as an historic resource.1z Theproject sponsor completed the HRE, and Department Preservation staff issued a Historic ResourceEvaluation Response (HRER).13 The HRER concluded that the proposed project would result in no impact

11 SF Planning Department, "Historic Resource Evaluation Response, 2008.0762E, Chinese Hospital;' dated February 27, 2012.

1z Carey and Company, 827-829 Kearny Street Historic Resource Evaluation, May 6, 2016.

13 SF Planning Department, "Historic Resource Evaluation Response, 2014-002030ENV, 827-829 Kearny Street," dated September 26,2016.

9

SAN FRANCISCOPLANNING DF.PAR7IMENT



upon the Chinatown Historic District, because the existing building to be demolished is not a contributor

to the district and because the proposed new construction, being a relatively compact new development

with massing, materials, ornamentation, and other features consistent with Secretan~ of the Interior

Standards for Rehabilitation, is generally compatible with, and does not detract from, the character-defining

features of the district.

Department staff analyzed the proposed new construction per the Secretary of the Interior Standards for

Rehabilitation (Standards) Standards 3, 9 and 10, which are the Standards that apply to the proposed

project.

Standard 3 states:

Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false

sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other

buildings, shall not be undertaken.

The HRER concluded that the proposed project complies with Standard 3, because it would include

features that reflect to the character-defining features of the district but are finished in a contemporary

manner. T'he proposed project, then, does not suggest a false sense of historical development, as elements

do not copy, but rather, allude to the historic district in a contemporary, but compatible manner.

Standard 9 states:

New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials,

features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from

the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing

to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

The HRER concluded that the proposed new construction mostly complies with Standard 9, because it is

generally compatible with the character-defining features of the Chinatown Historic District, with respect

to building massing, the design of the ground floor storefront, window alignment and placement,

building materials and building ornamentation. The HRE notes that although Preservation staff would

prefer a deeper set-back on the proposed building's fourth floor, the three-story portion of the proposed

building would match the contributing resources to the north.

Standard 10 states:

New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if

removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would

be unimpaired.

The HRER concluded that the proposed project complies with Standard 10, because it would not alter the

overall form and integrity of the district because it only involves the demolition of one non-contributing

building

In light of the above, the proposed project would not result in a substantial adverse change in the

significance of a historical resource.

Cumulative Impacts. There is no possibility of a significant cumulative historic resources impact on the

environment due to the proposed project for the following reasons. The proposed project would involve

the demolition of an existing non-contributing building and construct a new building on a site within an

historic district, and the design of the new building was determined to be compatible with the historic

10

SAN FRANCI$G6PLANNING ~EPART1111~JYT



district. Therefore, the proposed project could not contribute to any significant cumulative effect on

historic resources. The proposed project would not shade a public park and therefore could not make a

cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative shadow impact. The project site meets

the transportation screening criteria and would not contribute considerably to cumulative VMT. Theproposed project would not contribute considerably to any cumulative transit impacts. T'he cumulariveimpacts of nearby construction projects in combination with those of the proposed project's construction

would not be cumulatively considerable, because such construction would be of temporary duration, and

the sponsor and/or construction contractors of the proposed project would be required to coordinate with

various City departments such as the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency and Public Works

through the Transportation Advisory Staff Committee (TASC) to develop coordinated plans that would

address construction-related vehicle routing and pedestrian movements adjacent to the construction areafor the duration of any construction overlap. The air quality thresholds themselves are thresholds that

determine whether a project contributes to cumulative regional air quality impacts. Since the proposedproject meets the screening criteria, it would not contribute to a cumulative air quality impact. Similar tothe proposed project, projects within the vicinity of the project site would be required to comply with

uniformly applicable development policies, such as the San Francisco Noise Ordinance, the Construction

Site Runoff Ordinance, the Construction Dust Control Ordinance, the Maher Ordinance, Section 295, and

with California regulations that limit idling of construction-related vehicles to no more than five minutes.

In light of the above, no significant cumulative impacts or considerable contributions to significant

cumulative impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project.

Public Notice and Comment. On June 29, 2016 the Planning Department mailed a "Notification of Project

Receiving Environmental Review" to community organizations, tenants of the affected property and

properties adjacent to the project site, and those persons who own property within 300 feet of the project

site. No public comments were received.

Conclusion. The proposed project satisfies the criteria for exemption under the above-cited

classification(s). In addition, none of the CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 exceptions to the use of a

categorical exemption applies to the proposed project. For the above reasons, the proposed project is

appropriately exempt from environmental review.

11

snn ~aaxaiscoPLANNING DEPARTMENT

1

827 Kearny, LLC

827-829 Kearny Street Community Outreach

Neighborhood Group

Jin Chin (owner) 728 Washington St

Penang Garden Restaurant 728 Washington St

Thomas Wing H Hom Marital Trust c/o Judy Hom 732 Washington Street

Ellison LLC 736-738A Washington St

Hiroshi & Keiko Kawasaki 801-809 Kearny Street

Chu Fung 833 Kearny Street

Six Der Investment Inc.

C/O John J. Dito


SF Senior Services 28 Wentworth Place

Pon Yup Chong How Benevolent Assn. 62 Wentworth Place

Hung on Tong Society 601 Jackson / 851-861 Kearny

Tom Do Hing Trust

c/o Stanly S & Bill S. Tom

21-23 Cooper Ally

Tom Do Hing Trust

c/o Stanly S & Bill S. Tom

20 Cooper Ally

City College / SF Community College District 800-808 Kearny St

International Hotel Senior Housing 848-868 Kearny

Community Groups

Name/Organization Property Address Contact/

Responsible Parties

Assemblyman District 17th

1020 N Street, Room 104

Sacramento, CA 94249

David Chiu

Former San Francisco Board of Supervisor

(District 3)

City Hall, Room 244

1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett

Place

San Francisco, CA 94102

Julie Christensen

Former Legislative Aid for Board of

Supervisor (District 3)

City Hall, Room 244

1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett

Place


Kanishka Burns

Chinatown Community Development Center

663 Clay St,


Norman Fong -

Executive Director,

CCDC/Formal Commission President, San

Francisco Planning Department

663 Clay St,


Cindy Wu

2

Chinatown Community Development Center 848 Kearny St. 3rd Floor, San

Francisco, CA 94108

Diana Pang

Bow On Association 808 Clay St,


Tommy L Chiang

Ah Hoo Association 60 Wentworth St.

San Francisco

Chinatown Coalition for Better Housing 1525 Grant Avenue

San Francisco CA 94133

See CCDC

Chinatown COC Wai Ching Kwan

Chinese Chamber of Commerce 730 Sacramento St,


Chinese Cultural Center (Director) 750 Kearny St,


Shannon Yip

Chinese Hospital 845 Jackson St,


Brenda Yee

City College of San Francisco Chinatown

Campus Administration/Dean's Office

808 Kearny St, San Francisco,

CA 94108

Dr. Minh-Hoa Ta

Chinese Consol. Benevolent Association 843 Stockton St, San

Francisco, CA 94108

George Q Woo, Ted

Win Wong, Manson

F.Wong , Damon Yee,

Henry G. Low

Chinatown Historical Society 965 Clay St,


Sue Lee

Ho Ping Benevolent Association 759 Sacramento St,

San Francisco

Western Fukien Benevolent Association 25 Stone St,


Dai Chun Lum

Hoy Ping Benevolent Association 731 Sacramento St,

San Francisco

James S.L. Jung

International Hotel 848 Kearny Street


Henny Lee

Ka Yin Benevolent Association 945B Grant Ave,


Foster Shieh

On Lok Senior Health Services 1000 Montgomery St, San

Francisco, CA 94133

Grace Li (COO)

On Lok Lifeways 1333 Bush St, San Francisco,

CA 94109

Hung On Tong Society 601 Jackson St, San

Francisco, CA 94133

Donaldina Cameron House 920 Sacramento St, San

Francisco, CA 94108

Dave Miller

North East Medical Center 1520 Stockton Street


Eddie Chan (CEO)?

secretary’s name is

Bonnie Siu

Portsmouth Square Garage Board 733 Kearny St,


Jerry Lee

3

Past President of the Kearny Street Housing

Corporation, ISHI, Former Director of SF

Mental Health

848 Kearny Streeet


Linda Wang

St. Mary's Schools and Chinese Catholic

Center

838 Kearny St,


Fr. Daniel McCotter,

Jerry Lee

Self Help for the Elderly

731 Sansome Street, Suite

100


Anni Chung

Yee Yin Association 35 Spofford St, San

Francisco, CA 94108

Ying Leung

Retired architect and renowned historian of

Chinese American studies

1350 Union Street


Phil Choy

KE

AR

NY

ST

RE

ET

Existing Ground Floor Plan0' 1' 5'

2North

Up

Dn

Dn

Dn

Existing Second Floor Floor Plan0' 1' 5'

3North

Breakroom

Lightcourt

Sewing Room

Cl.

Shed

Commercial (Vacant)

HWH

Entry

Entry

DisplayWindow

DisplayWindow

DisplayWindow

Office

Display Cases

OfficeOffice

WorkroomUp

A-1Copyright 2016 Stan Teng, Architect

Drawing Log:

Date MarkDescription

827-829 Kearny St. San Francisco, CA

ExistingBuilding Plan, Elevations & Section

Stan Teng, A.I.A.

Architectural StudioThe Maybeck Building1736 Stockton St.Suite 4, 3rd FloorSan Francisco, CA 94133

Tel: 415. 590-2870E-Mail: stanarch @ earthlink.net

KE

AR

NY

ST

RE

ET

Existing Basement Floor Plan0' 1' 5'

1North

KE

AR

NY

ST

RE

ET

Bath Office

Work Surface

Aisle

Cl.Cl.

Up

Dn

Up

Dn

Up

LedgeOpen

toBelow

Light Court

Up

enjoyveggie.com

KE

AR

NY

ST

RE

ET

Existing Roof Plan0' 1' 5'

4North

Existing Kearny Street Elevation0' 1' 5'

5

CALIFORNIAGIFTS

415-956-7868

EnjoyVegetarian Restaurant

Roll Up Grille

51.2'

26.02'

27.42'

50.0'

827 825

27.09'

Subject Property

WORLD GINSENG CENTER, INC.

Existing Profile of Subject Building Looking South to Adjacent Encroaching Properties0' 1' 5'

6North

Roof of Subject Property

Line of Subject Property Parapet

Outline of Adjacent Properties to the South of Subject Property

Outline of Adjacent Properties Stair Encroaching and Supported by Subject Property

825 Kearny Property 720 Washington Property

(No

Exis

ting

Stre

et T

rees)

(No Existing Street Trees)

Skylt. Above

Skylt. Above

Skylt. Above

Skylt. Above

Commercial (Vacant)

Date: 11/25/16

8'-6

"

8'-6

"

7'-9

"7'

-2"

6'-2

"

4'-3

" 7'-2

"

8'-1

0"8'

-0"

Existing East - West Building Section 3North Existing View Looking Towards North Adjacent Building

0' 1' 5'2

North

Existing Subject Building North Elevation(Zero lot line brick wall against existing adjacent building)

Outline of existing adjacent building to the North

Existing Subject Building North Elevation(Zero lot line brick wall against existing adjacent building)

A-2

Drawing Log:

Date MarkDescription

827-829 Kearny St. San Francisco, CA

Stan Teng, A.I.A.



ExistingBuilding Plan, Elevations & Section

STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY CHAIN OF TITLE GUARANTEE, FILE NO. 01180-31142

BASIS OF SURVEY

GENERAL NOTES1. DETAILS NEAR PROPERTY LINES MAY NOT BE TO SCALE.2. ALL PROPERTY LINE ANGLES ARE 90 DEGREES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.3. DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF.

DES.

DRW.: JP

SURV: DD

REV NO.

CHK.: BR

FOR

TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY

JOB NO.S-8244

SCALE: 1" = 8'

DATE: 3-8-13

SHEET: 1

OF: 1

SAN FRANCISCO CALIFORNIA

OF A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S BLOCK NO. 194

BUDDHA'S UNIVERSAL CHURCH

SURVEY REFERENCE

DATED JANUARY 31, 2013.

859 HARRISON STREET, SUITE 200SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107

LAND SURVEYORS

(415) 543-4500

MARTIN M. RON ASSOCIATES

CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO MONUMENT MAP NO. 4 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY AND COUNTY SURVEYOR.

BOUNDARY &

1.

BLOCK DIAGRAM OF 50 VARA BLOCK 89 DATED OCTOBER 15, 1908 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY AND COUNTY SURVEYOR.

2.

BENCHMARK NOTECROW CUT WEST RIM OPEN GRATE MANHOLE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF KEARNY AND WASHINGTON STREETS. ELEVATION = 30.29 FEET CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO DATUM.

4-8-131ADDED BASEMENT INFORMATION & 2ND FLOOR ELEV. OF LOT 5

LOT 29

LOT 7 LOT 4

LOT 5

LOT 3

29.9

17'

29.9

17'

107.917'

107.917' KEA

RNY

STRE

ET

MTL.S

0.3'

± O

V. @

NU

MER

OUS

SE

ISM

IC B

OLT

S A

LONG

BLD

G.

FACE

WV

E

GV

WV

PM

PM

PMGB

GB

WM

WM

WM

WM

TS

SLE

GSV

GR

SV

GB

DOORWAY

GR

DOORWAY

GB

GB

METAL GRATE@ BREEZEWAY

DOORWAY

METAL DOOR

(75'

R/W

)

1 STORY WOODFRAME PORTION

5 STORYCONCRETEBUILDING

2 STORY W/MEZZANINEOVER PARTIAL BASEMENT

CONCRETE BUILDING

3 STORYBRICK BUILDING

CONCRETE

CONCRETE

2 STORYOVER BASEMENTBRICK BUILDING

3RD STORY ONLY(METAL STAIRS &

LANDING AND

CONCRETE

BREEZEWAY

BELOW)

REAR YARD (INACCESSIBLE)

CHIMNEYRO

OF

CORN

ICE

65.7

RC

26.38

BW(G

B)

26.02

BW

SET MARK ON BLDG. CORNER, 4' UP

0.06' OV. @ BLDG., 4' UP

0.11

' CLR

. @

BLD

G.,

4' U

P

0.11

' OV

. @

MA

RK

0.06' CLR. @ MARK

0.07

' OV

. @

RO

OF

69.0

RP

67.6

RP

66.8

RP

51.2

RP

66.8

RP

65.0

RP51

.4RP

48.2

RP48.2

RP

47.8

RP

65.0

RP

0.01

' CLR

. @ B

LDG.

@

TOP

OF

1ST

STO

RY

25.1

CONC.

44.76

TW(8

")

8" C

ONC

. WA

LL A

TOP

BRO

KEN

12"

BRI

CK W

ALL

44.57

TW(8

")

41.07

50.25

TW(S

TEP)

WEST FACE OF WALL INACCESSIBLE

0.11

' CLR

. @

BLD

G.

METAL FENCE ATOP ROOF 24

.9CO

NC.

65.8

TOP O

F CH

IMNEY

INA

CC.

@ B

LDG.

26.63

THRE

SHOLD

50.18

TW

0.02' CLR. @ RP

99.0

RP

0.06' CLR. @ RP

49.02

TW(1

8"±)

31.46

MLDG

MLDG

18"±

BRI

CK W

ALLCL

F

18"±

CO

NC.

WA

LL

30.05

TW(S

TEP)

30.02

TW(S

TEP)

49.00

TW(1

8"±)

EAST

FA

CE

OF

CONC

. W

ALL

(W

IDTH

UN

KNO

WN)

99.0

RP

0.80

' OV

. @ 3

RD

STO

RY O

VER

HANG

65.8

RP

CONC.

20.62

CONC.

20.61

CONC.

20.59

CONC.

20.59

20.60

0.88

' OV

. @ 3

RD S

TORY

O

VER

HANG

65.8

RP

21.56

CONC.

22.12

CLDG

4" GLASS & METAL WALL

CONC.COLUMN

METAL LANDING @3RD STORY

51.41

MLDG

0.56

' OV

. @

LAND

ING22

.37CO

NC. (B

ELOW

STAIRS

)

22.43

CONC.

(BEL

OW

STAIRS

)

47.8

RP48

.2RP

CLF ATOP ROOF

47.6

RP48

.2RP

65.9

RP

MTL.S

22.15

CLDG

CLDG

0.06

' OV

. @

BLDG

., 8'

UP

48.6

RP

14" CONC. BEAM W/CLF ATOP (BEAM ATOP LOT 4 BLDG.)

1.09

' OV

. @ B

EAM

49.35

TB 49.34

TB

1.08

' OV

. @

BEA

M

51.51

MLDG

0.58

' OV

. @

LAND

ING

0.15

' OV

. @

LAND

ING

CONC.

52.3

RP

19.38

BASE

MENT

FLOOR

(WOOD)

28.06 28

.07 4" W

IDE

MET

AL

DOO

R

CONC.

52.3

@ RP

28.05

48.5

RP 48.9

RP

61.5

ROOF

PEAK

27.90

27.88

49.0

RP(G

B)

50.0

RP

3" W

IDE

MET

AL

ROLL

-UP

DOO

R0.

04' O

V.

@ B

LDG.

, 4'

UP 0.11' OV.

@ BLDG., 4' UP

52.1

RP

49.6

ROOF

EAVE

SET MARK ON BLDG. CORNER, 4' UP

0.09' OV. @ MARK

5.16

' CLR

. @

MA

RK

27.09

1ST F

LOOR

(LINOLE

UM)

26.68

BW26

.98BW

(GB)

27.42

BW27

.56BW

27.97

BW

28.08

1ST F

LOOR

(CARP

ET)

ON

LINE

± @

BLD

G

25.67

BW

25.95

1ST F

LOOR

(WOOD)

TC 24

.81

FL 24

.46

24.76

TC 25

.04

FL 24

.96

25.27

TC(G

B) 25

.36

FL 25

.13

TC 25

.61

FL 25

.52

25.74

TC 26

.22

FL 26

.07

TC 26

.43GB

(STE

P)

26.43

26.10

26.21

26.67TC

26.85

FL 26

.58

METALLANDING@ ROOF

CONC

RETE

WA

LK

6" C

URB

ASP

HALT

ROOF

EAVE

0.94

'± O

V.

@ C

OLU

MN

3" W

IDE

GLA

SS &

M

ETA

L DO

OR

26.90

BW(G

B)

CONCRETE BREEZEWAY BELOW STAIRS & LANDING

DOWN

DOWN

3 STORYOVER BASEMENT

PORTION

(3)1" RISERS, 1' HIGH

AREA INACCESSIBLE

TW(1

8"±)18

"±

BRIC

K W

ALL

(B

ROKE

N SECT

ION)


0.2'

± O

V. @

CH

IMNE

Y FL

ASH

ING

20.8

CONC.

UNDE

R

MLDG

R/W

LIN

E

2.0'

OV

. @

ROO

F CO

RNIC

E

47.50'

5.00

'

EASEMENT FOR RIGHT OF WAY AND PASSAGEWAY(6185 O.R. 21)(5.00'x47.50')

"827-829 KEARNY STREET"

NOTES:1. BUILDINGS ON LOTS 3 AND 7 MAY HAVE BASEMENTS. 2. VARIOUS STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS THAT SUPPORT THE METAL STAIRS/LANDINGS ARE NOT SHOWN. 3. VARIOUS UTILITIES BETWEEN LOTS 4 & 5 ARE NOT SHOWN.

5.00

'

3,229± SQ.FT.

INSIDE FACE OFBASEMENT WALL

INSI

DE O

F BA

SEM

ENT

WA

LL


38.11

2ND FL

OOR

(LINOLE

UM)

16.54

BASE

MENT

FLOOR

(CONC.)

16.78

BASE

MENT

FLOOR

(CONC.)

INSI

DE O

F BA

SEM

ENT

WA

LL

STEP

IN

BASE

MEN

T FL

OO

R

18.31

BASE

MENT

FLOOR

(LINOLE

UM) 18

.36BA

SEMEN

T

FLOOR

(LINOLE

UM)

STEP

IN

BASE

MEN

T FL

OO

R

17.83

BASE

MENT

FLOOR

(CONC.)

5'-0

"

28.05

NORTH

Boundary & Topographic Survey0' 1' 5'

1North

Copyright 2016 Stan Teng, Architect

Date: 11/25/16

ALIGN TAG

ELEVATION DATUM

SECTION CUT

ELEVATION SYMBOL

DETAIL BUBBLE

ROOM IDENTIFICTIONTAG WITH RM. #

TEXT

######

######

ALIGN

PROPERTY LINE

SETBACK

######

F-XX

WINDOW/LOUVER MARK.SEE WINDOW/LOUVER SCHEDULE.

XDOOR MARK.SEE DOOR SCHEDULE.

WALL TYPE.SEE WALL TYPE SCHEDULE.

1 REVISION TAG

R.C.P. ROOMIDENIFICATION TAG WITHRM. # AND

FINISH CEILING HEIGHTWHERE SHOWN

EL.#

RMNAME

X

TC 203'-0" TOP OF CONCRETE CURB/WALL MARK W/ELEVATION

X

RM#RMNAME

EL.

DELUGE SPRINKLER

2-HR MINIMUM FIRE RATED WALL

ARCHITECTHerman Coliver Locus ArchitectureRobert Herman, FAIA, Principal423 Tehama StreetSan Francisco, CA [email protected]

BUDDHA'S UNIVERSAL CHURCH (E)

PROPOSED PROJECT SITE

CHURCH ANNEX BUILDING (E)

720 WASHINGTON

825 KEARNY

827-829 KEARNY

PROPOSED SITE827-829 KEARNY

PORTSMOUTHSQUARE

KEARN

YSTR

EET

WASHINGTON STREET

JACKSON STREET

CLAY STREET

GR

AN

TAVEN

UE

WEN

TWO

RTH

PLACE

COLUMBUS AVENUE

PACIFIC AVENUE

WALTER

ULU

MPLAC

E

COMMERCIAL STREET

THE PROPOSAL IS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 4-STORY MIXED-USEBUILDING FOR THE BUDDHA'S UNIVERSAL CHURCH TO SERVE AS A RESOURCECENTER FOR THE TEACHING AND STUDY OF BUDDHISM. THE PROPOSED NEWBUILDING WILL PROVIDE CLASSROOM AND MEETING SPACE, AS WELL ASRESIDENTIAL HOUSING FOR SENIOR / ELDER MEMBERS OF THE CHURCH, ANDGROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL SPACE.

THE EXISTING 2-STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING WOULD BE DEMOLISHED ANDREPLACED WITH A NEW 4-STORY BASEMENT MIXED-USE BUILDING, TOTALLINGAPPROXIMATELY 11,474 SQUARE FEET. THE PROJECT CONTAINS APPROXIMATELY1,635 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE, 7,545 SQUARE FEET OFINSTITUTIONAL SPACE, ONE 2,294 GROSS SF (1,858 NET SF) DWELLING UNIT WITH 3BEDROOMS, 3 BATHROOMS, AND NO OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES.

AREA CALCULATIONS - SUMMARY

PROGRAM AREACOMMERCIAL 1,635 SFINSTITUTIONAL 7,520 SFRESIDENTIAL 2,319 SF

TOTAL 11,474 SF

AREA CALCULATIONS - BY LEVEL

PROGRAM GROSS AREA

BASEMENT571 SF

(AS DEFINED BY SF PLANNING CODE)

INSTITUTIONALTOTAL 571 SF

LEVEL 11,635 SFCOMMERCIAL1,215 SF

25 SFINSTITUTIONAL

TOTAL 2,875 SFRESIDENTIAL

LEVEL 22,876 SFINSTITUTIONAL

TOTAL 2,876 SF

LEVEL 32,858 SFINSTITUTIONAL

TOTAL 2,858 SF

LEVEL 42,294 SF GROSSRESIDENTIAL

TOTAL 2,294 SF

GRAND TOTAL 11,474 SF

(1,858 SF NET)

ALL WORK SHALL BE BUILT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE BUILDINGCODES, SAFETY ORDINANCES AND ACCESSIBILITY REQUIREMENTSCURRENTLY IN EFFECT INCLUDING THOSE LISTED BELOW:

1. 2013 SAN FRANCISCO BUILDING CODE CONSISTING OF THE 2013CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, THE 2013 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE, ANDTHE 2010 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, WITH SANFRANCISCO AMENDMENTS.

2. THE 2013 SAN FRANCISCO ELECTRICAL CODE CONSISTING OF THE 2013CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE WITH SAN FRANCISCO AMENDMENTS.

3. THE 2013 SAN FRANCISCO ENERGY CODE CONSISTING OF THE 2010CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE WITH NO LOCAL AMENDMENTS.

4. THE 2013 SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING CODE.

5. THE 2013 SAN FRANCISCO MECHANICAL CODE CONSISTING OF THE 2013CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE WITH SAN FRANCISCO AMENDMENTS.

6. THE 2013 SAN FRANCISCO PLUMBING CODE CONSISTING OF THE 2013CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE WITH SAN FRANCISCO AMENDMENTS.

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:

Written dimensions on these drawings shall haveprecedence over scaled dimensions. Contractors shallverify, and be responsible for, all dimensions andconditions on the job and this office must be notified ofany variations from the dimensions and conditions shownby these drawings. Shop details must be submitted tothis office for approval before proceeding with fabrication.

IF THIS SHEET IS SMALLER THAN 30"x42" THEN IT HAS BEEN REDUCED

Rev. No. Revision Date

Key Plan:

Consultant:

General Notes/Legend:

APN: XXXXXXXX

REF. NORTH

Project Number

herman coliver locus423 Tehama Street San Francisco, California 94103T 415.495.1776 F 415.552.9811 E [email protected]

DD PROGRESS SET 9/15/2016

DRAWINGS FOR PLANNING CODE VARIANCES& CONDITIONAL USE PERMT

11/28/2016

As indicated

A0.0


AH

11/28/2016

1303

COVER SHEET, LOCATIONPLAN, SITE PHOTOS

827 - 829 Kearny StreetSan Francisco, CA 94108

RH & ST

827-829 KEARNY STREET827 - 829 KEARNY ST, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94108

(FOR REFERENCE ONLY)A0.0 COVER SHEET, LOCATION PLAN, SITE PHOTOSA0.3 SITE SURVEYA1.0 SITE PLANA2.1a FLOOR PLANS - BASEMENT & LEVEL 1A2.1b FLOOR PLANS - LEVEL 2 & LEVEL 3A2.2a FLOOR PLANS - 4TH FLOOR, ROOFA3.1a EXTERIOR ELEVATION - KEARNY STREETA3.1b EXTERIOR ELEVATION - SOUTH PROPERTY LINEA3.1c EXTERIOR ELEVATION - NORTH PROPERTY LINEA3.1d EXTERIOR ELEVATION - WESTA3.3a BUILDING SECTION - THROUGH RETAIL ENTRYA3.3b BUILDING SECTION - THROUGH PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE

MAX. MAXIMUMMANUF. MANUFACTURERL.P. LOW POINTLAV. LAVATORYJT JOINTINSUL. INSULATIONH.P. HIGH POINTHT. HEIGHTGYP. BD. GYPSUM BOARDGL. GLASSGA. GAUGEG.S.M. GALVANIZED SHEET METALGFI GROUND FAULT INTERRUPTERFT. FOOT / FEETFNDN. FOUNDATIONFIXT. FIXTUREFIN. FINISHF.O.S. FACE OF STUDF.O.F. FACE OF FINISHF.O.C. FACE OF CONCRETEFLR. FLOORF.E.C. FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINETF.F. FINISH FLOORF.D. FLOOR DRAINFCP FIBER CEMENT PANELFC FIBER CEMENTEXT. EXTERIOREXP. EXPANSIONEQUIP. EQUIPMENTEQ. EQUALENCL. ENCLOSUREEMERG. EMERGENCYELEC. ELECTRIC(AL)EL. ELEVATION(E) EXISTINGDWG. DRAWINGDN. DOWNDIA. DIAMETERDET. DETAILDBL. DOUBLE(D) DEMOLISHCPT. CARPETCONT. CONTINUOUSCONC. CONCRETECOL. COLUMNCLR. CLEARCLK. CAULKCLG. CEILINGCAB. CABINETC.J. CONTROL JOINTCL. CENTERLINECA. SECURITY CAMERAB.U.R. BUILT UP ROOFINGBM. BEAMBOT. BOTTOMBLW. BELOWBLDG. BUILDINGBD. BOARDB.F.F. BELOW FINISH FLOORALUM. ALUMINUMA.F.F. ABOVE FINISH FLOORABV. ABOVE@ AT

WRB WEATHER RESISTANT BARRIERWC WATER CLOSETW.A. WATERPROOFWD. WOODW.O. WHERE OCCURSW/O WITHOUTW/ WITHV.I.F. VERIFY IN FIELDU.O.N. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTEDTYP. TYPICALTEL. TELEPHONET.P. TOILET PAPERT.O.STL. TOP OF STEELT.O.S. TOP OF SLABT.O.C. TOP OF CURBT.O. TOP OFT.C. TOP OF CURBSTRUC. STRUCTURESTL. STEELSTD. STANDARDST. STREETS.S. STAINLESS STEELSTD. STANDARDSPECS SPECIFICATIONSSIM. SIMILARSHT. SHEETS.S.D. SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGSS.P.D. SEE PLUMBING DRAWINGSS.M.D. SEE MECHANICAL DRAWINGSS.L.D. SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGSS.E.D. SEE ELECTRICAL DRAWINGSS.C.D. SEE CIVIL DRAWINGSS.A.M. SELF-ADHERED MEMBRANES.A.D. SEE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGSS.D. STORM DRAINRM. ROOMRES. RESILIENTREQ'D REQUIREDREF. REFRIGERATORR.W.L. CONCRETER. COLUMNPT. POINTPTD. PAINTEDPLYWD. PLYWOODPERIM. PERIMETERPERF. PERFORATEDP.T. PRESSURE TREATED /...PSL PARALLEL STRAND BOARDP.LAM. PLASTIC LAMINATEP.L. PROPERTY LINEOP. OPPOSITEO.H. OPPOSITE HANDO.C. ON CENTERO/ OVERNO. NUMBERN.T.S. NOT TO SCALEN.I.C. NOT IN CONTRACTN.A. NOT APPLICABLE(N) NEWMTL. METALMIN. MINIMUM

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

LEGEND OF SYMBOLS GENERAL NOTES SHEET INDEX CONSULTANTS CODE REFERENCES

VICINITY MAP CONTEXTUAL SITE PLAN

PROJECT DESCRIPTIONPROJECT DATA

EXHIBIT A

3,229± SQ.FT.

"827-829 KEARNY STREET"

(75'

R/W

)

WASHINGTON STREET

105.

00'

SAN FRANCISCO CALIFORNIA

TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY


BOUNDARY &

NORTH

BASIS OF SURVEY

GENERAL NOTES

LEGEND

SURVEY REFERENCE

BENCHMARK NOTE

FOROF A PORTION OF ASSESSOR'S BLOCK NO. 194

47.50'

5.00

'

EASEMENT FORRIGHT OF WAY ANDPASSAGEWAY(6185 O.R. 21)(5.00'x47.50')

5.00

'

3'x5

' BR

ICK

SEW

ER W

/16"

PE.

P LI

NE

(PE

R 2

008

SEW

ER D

EPAR

TMEN

T R

ECO

RD

S)3'

x5' B

RIC

K SE

WER

W/1

6" P

E.P

LIN

E

42" SEWER LINE24" SEWER LINE

NOTE: SEWER LINES AREPER 2008 SEWERDEPARTMENT RECORDS)

3'x5' BRICK SEWERW/16" PE.P LINE

65.7

RC

26.38

BW(GB)

26.02

BW69.0

RP67.6

RP

66.8

RP

51.2

RP

66.8

RP

65.0

RP51

.4RP

48.2

RP

48.2

RP

47.8

RP

65.0

RP

25.1

CONC.

44.76

TW(8")

44.57

TW(8")

41.07

50.25

TW(STEP) 24

.9CONC.

65.8

TOP OF

CHIMNEY

26.63

THRESHOLD

50.18

TW

99.0

RP

49.02

TW(18"±)

31.46

MLDG30

.05TW(S

TEP)30

.02TW(S

TEP)

49.00

TW(18"±)

99.0

RP

65.8

RP20

.62CONC.

20.61

CONC.20

.59CONC.

20.59

20.60

65.8

RP

21.56

CONC.22

.12CLD

G

51.41

MLDG

22.37

CONC.(B

ELOW

STAIRS)22

.43CONC.

(BELO

WSTAIR

S)

47.8

RP48

.2RP

47.6

RP48

.2RP

65.9

RP

22.15

CLDG

48.6

RP

49.35

TB 49.34

TB

51.51

MLDG

52.3

RP

19.38

BASEMENT

FLOOR

(WOOD)

28.05

28.06 28

.07

52.3

@ R

P

28.05

48.5

RP 48.9

RP

61.5

ROOFPEAK

27.90

27.88

49.0

RP(GB)

50.0

RP

52.1

RP

49.6

ROOFEAVE

27.09

1ST FLO

OR

(LINOLE

UM)

26.68

BW26

.98BW(G

B)

27.42

BW27

.56BW

27.97

BW

28.08

1ST FLO

OR

(CARPET)

25.67

BW

25.95

1ST FLO

OR

(WOOD)

TC 24.81

FL 24.4

6

24.76

TC 25.04

FL 24.9

6

25.27

TC(GB) 25

.36

FL 25.1

3

TC 25.61

FL 25.5

2

25.74

TC 26.22

FL 26.0

7

TC 26.43

GB(STEP)

26.43

26.10

26.21

26.67TC 26

.85FL 2

6.58

RIM20

.32

RIM24

.41

ROOFEAVE

BOTTOMOF

BOX=18.9

±

(FILLED

W/WATER)

INV. 9

.7±

26.90

BW(GB)

TW(18"±)

20.8

CONC.UNDER M

LDG

38.11

2ND FLO

OR

(LINOLE

UM)

16.54

BASEMENT

FLOOR

(CONC.)

16.78

BASEMENT

FLOOR

(CONC.)

STEP

INBA

SEM

ENT

FLO

OR

18.31

BASEMENT

FLOOR

(LINOLE

UM)

18.36

BASEMENT

FLOOR

(LINOLE

UM)

STEP

INBA

SEM

ENT

FLO

OR

17.83

BASEMENT

FLOOR

(CONC.)

1 STORY WOODFRAME PORTION

5 STORYCONCRETEBUILDING

2 STORY W/MEZZANINEOVER PARTIAL BASEMENT

CONCRETE BUILDING

3 STORYBRICK BUILDING

2 STORYOVER BASEMENTBRICK BUILDING

3RDSTORYONLY(METAL STAIRS& LANDING ANDCONCRETEBREEZEWAYBELOW)

3 STORYOVER BASEMENT

PORTION

GB

GB

GB

GB

GB

PM

PM

PM

WV

E

GV

WV

S

S

EWM

WM

WM

WM

TS

SLE

GSV

GR

SV

GR

METAL GRATE@ BREEZEWAY

166'

±

SEWER MANHOLE @INTERSECTION OFKEARNY & JACKSONSTREETS

(3)1" RISERS,1' HIGH

E

0.3'

± O

V. @

NU

MER

OU

SSE

ISM

IC B

OLT

SAL

ON

G B

LDG

.FA

CE

SETMARK ONBLDG.CORNER,4' UP

0.06' OV.@ BLDG.,4' UP0.

11' C

LR.

@ B

LDG

.,4'

UP

0.11

' OV.

@ M

ARK

0.06' CLR.@ MARK

0.07

' OV.

@ R

OO

F

0.01

' CLR

. @ B

LDG

. @TO

P O

F 1S

T ST

OR

Y

WESTFACE OFWALLINACCESSIBLE

0.11

' CLR

.@

BLD

G.

INAC

C.

@ BLD

G.

0.02' CLR.@ RP

0.06' CLR.@ RP

0.80

' OV.

@ 3

RD

STO

RY

OVE

RH

ANG

0.88

' OV.

@ 3

RD

STO

RY

OVE

RH

ANG

0.56

' OV.

@LA

ND

ING

0.06

' OV.

@BL

DG

., 8'

UP

1.09

' OV.

@ B

EAM

1.08

' OV.

@BE

AM

0.58

' OV.

@LA

ND

ING

0.15

' OV.

@LA

ND

ING

0.04

' OV.

@ B

LDG

.,4'

UP 0.11' OV.

@ BLDG.,4' UP

SETMARK ONBLDG.CORNER,4' UP

0.09' OV.@ MARK

5.16

' CLR

.@

MAR

K

ON

LIN

E±@

BLD

G

0.94

'± O

V.@

CO

LUM

N

0.2'

± O

V. @

CH

IMN

EYFL

ASH

ING

2.0'

OV.

@R

OO

FC

OR

NIC

EMTL.S

DOORWAYDOORWAYDOORWAY

METALDOOR

CONCRETE

CONCRETE


CHIMNEY

RO

OF

CO

RN

ICE

8" C

ON

C. W

ALL

ATO

PBR

OKE

N 1

2" B

RIC

K W

ALL

METALFENCEATOPROOF

MLDG

18"±

BR

ICK

WAL

L

CLF

18"±

CO

NC

.W

ALL

EAST

FAC

EO

F C

ON

C.

WAL

L(W

IDTH

UN

KNO

WN

)

CONC.

4" GLASS& METALWALL

CONC.COLUMN

METAL LANDING@ 3RD STORY

CLFATOPROOF

MTL.S

CLDG

14" CONC. BEAM W/CLFATOP (BEAM ATOP LOT 4BLDG.)

CONC.

4" W

IDE

MET

ALD

OO

R

CONC.

3" W

IDE

MET

ALR

OLL

-UP

DO

OR

METALLANDING@ ROOF

CO

NC

RET

E W

ALK

6" C

UR

B

ASPH

ALT

3" W

IDE

GLA

SS&

MET

AL D

OO

R

CONCRETE BREEZEWAYBELOW STAIRS & LANDING

DOWN

DOWN

AREAINACCESSIBLE

18"±

BRIC

KW

ALL

(BR

OKE

NSE

CTI

ON

)


R/W

LIN

E

NOTES:1. BUILDINGS ON LOTS 3 AND 7 MAY HAVE BASEMENTS.2. VARIOUS STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS THAT SUPPORT THE METAL STAIRS/LANDINGS ARE NOT SHOWN.3. VARIOUS UTILITIES BETWEEN LOTS 4 & 5 ARE NOT SHOWN.

KEAR

NY

STR

EET

29.9

17'

29.9

17'

107.917'

107.917'

LOT 29

LOT 7 LOT 4

LOT 5

LOT 3

STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY CHAIN OF TITLE GUARANTEE, FILE NO. 01180-31142

1. DETAILS NEAR PROPERTY LINES MAY NOT BE TO SCALE.2. ALL PROPERTY LINE ANGLES ARE 90 DEGREES UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE.

CLR.

3. DIMENSIONS ARE IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF.

DATED JANUARY 31, 2013.

CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO MONUMENT MAP NO. 4 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY ANDCOUNTY SURVEYOR.

CLEAR OF PROPERTY LINE

WV WATER VALVEGAS VALVEGV

ELECTROLIER

PM PARKING METERWM WATER METER

TS TRAFFIC SIGNAL PULLBOX

SL STREET LIGHT PULLBOX

E ELECTRIC PULLBOX

G GAS BOX

SV SEWER VENT

ELECTROLIER

OV. OVER PROPERTY LINEBLDG. BUILDINGCONC. CONCRETEINACC. INACCESSIBLER/W RIGHT OF WAYCLF CHAIN LINK FENCEMTL.S METAL STAIRSMLDG METAL LANDING

TC TOP OF CURBFL FLOW LINEBW BACK OF WALKGB GRADE BREAKRP ROOF PARAPETRC ROOF CORNICETB TOP OF BEAMTW TOP OF WALL

CLDG CONCRETE LANDING

S SEWER MANHOLE

GR GAS RISER

1.

BLOCK DIAGRAM OF 50 VARA BLOCK 89 DATED OCTOBER 15, 1908 ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OFTHE CITY AND COUNTY SURVEYOR.

2.

CROW CUT WEST RIM OPEN GRATE MANHOLE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF KEARNY ANDWASHINGTON STREETS. ELEVATION = 30.29 FEET CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO DATUM.

E ELECTRIC MANHOLE

DES.

DRW.: JP

SURV: DD

REV NO.CHK.: BR

JOB NO.S-8244

SCALE: 1" = 8'

DATE: 3-8-13

SHEET: 1

OF: 1859 HARRISON STREET, SUITE 200

SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94107

LAND SURVEYORS

(415) 543-4500

MARTIN M. RON ASSOCIATES

4-8-131ADDED BASEMENTINFORMATION & 2NDFLOOR ELEV. OFLOT 5


INSI

DE

OF

BASE

MEN

T W

ALL


INSI

DE

OF

BASE

MEN

T W

ALL

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

REF. NORTH

Project Number




11/28/2016

1/8" = 1'-0"

A0.3


11/28/2016

1303

SITE SURVEY


1/8" = 1'-0"SITE SURVEY2

(FOR REFERENCE ONLY)

EXHIBIT A

EXISTING CHURCH BUILDING


(720 WASHINGTON)


3 STORIES(825 KEARNY)

EXISTING BUILDING

(803-805 KEARNY)2 STORIES

KEAR

NY S

TREE

T

WASHINGTON STREET

EXISTING ADJACENT BUILDING


ADJACENT BLDG CORNICE OVERHANGSIN FRONT OF PROPERTY

EXISTING ADJACENTBLDG

(728 WASHINGTON)

5 STORIES

EXTERIOR EGRESS STAIR FROM720 WASHINGTON ROOF DECK

ROOF DECK

EXTERIOR EGRESS STAIRFROM 720 WASHINGTON

ROOF DECK

REA

RYA

RD

15' -

6"

REAR YARD

13' - 10"

(E) RETAINING WALL


(32 WENTWORTH)

5 STORIES

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PRIVATE PARKING LOT

RETAIL

RETAIL ENTRY

MAIN BUILDING ENTRYEXIT OPEN TO SKY

NEW 2ND FLOOR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE (ABOVE)CONNECTING TO 825 KEARNY ST. &720 WASHINGTON ST. CHURCH

SUBJECT PROPERTY

EXISTING BUILDING

(801 KEARNY)2 STORIES

STREET TREE LOCATIONSUBJECT TO CITY APPROVAL

(4) CLASS 2 BICYCLE PARKING,LOCATION SUBJECT TO CITYAPPROVAL

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

REF. NORTH

Project Number




11/28/2016

3/32" = 1'-0"

A1.0


AH

11/28/2016

1303

SITE PLAN


RH & ST

3/32" = 1'-0"SITE PLAN1

EXHIBIT A

12

A

D

35678

C

B

4

SEIS

MIC

GAP

0' - 8

"

CORRIDOR

ELEV MACH RM

LINE OF EXISTING BASEMENT

STOR

AGE

STORAGE TANKSIZE / LOCATION TBD

STAIR STRUCTURE ABOVE

(12) CLASS 1 BICYCLEPARKING SPACES

UTILITY CONNECTIONLOCATIONS CLOSE TO STREET

ELEC

GAS

AIR SUPPLY / EXHAUST TOSTREET LEVEL

18' - 4" 13' - 1" 19' - 6" 15' - 11" 19' - 10" 11' - 10" 6' - 0"

104' - 6"

8' - 8

"10

' - 7"

8' - 8

"

27' -

11"

SMOKE GUARD

(E) RETAINING WALL

(N) 12' WALL

STAIR 1

1A3.3a

1A3.3b

MIN. CLEAR

3' - 0"

SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE2' - 8"

12

A

D

35678

C

B

4

SEIS

MIC

GAP

0' - 7

" EASE

MENT

5' - 0

"

SEIS

MIC

GAP

0' - 8

"

SEIS

MIC

GAP

7"

18' - 4" 13' - 1" 19' - 6" 35' - 9" 11' - 10" 6' - 0"

8' - 8

"10

' - 7"

8' - 8

"

RETAIL

STAIR 2

STAIR 1

LOBBY

ELEV

(E) EASEMENT EXIT WAY OVER 825KEARNY ST. PROPERTY FOR

CHURCH AT 720 WASHINGTON ST.

OTR

TRASH

(E) METAL STAIR ENCROACHMENT

SEIS

MIC

G AP

0'-7

"

RETAIL ENTRY

(N) PLANTER BOXES

(N) BRIDGEABOVE

GATE

RESTROOM

MAILBOX

SMOKE GUARD

PROPERTY LINE

RETAIL STORAGE

SEISMIC GAP0' - 7"

BALCONY ABOVE

1' - 2"

2' - 0"

WASTE PIPE LOCATION

SIDEWALK CURB

DELUGE SPRINKLERS

A3.1a1

A3.1b

2

1A3.3a

1A3.3b

104' - 6"

27'-

11"

A3.1d 1

A3.1c

1

(4) CLASS 2 BICYCLE PARKING,LOCATION SUBJECT TO CITYAPPROVAL


(E) RETAINING WALL(E) RETAINING WALL

SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE2' - 8"

0' 2' 4' 8' 16'

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

REF. NORTH

Project Number




11/28/2016

1/4" = 1'-0"

A2.1a


AH

11/28/2016

1303

FLOOR PLANS - BASEMENT& LEVEL 1


RH / ST

1/4" = 1'-0"BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN1

1/4" = 1'-0"LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN2

EXHIBIT A

12

A

D

35678

C

B

4

STAIR 1RESTROOM - M

RESTROOM - WWARMING KITCHEN

TRASH

BANQUET

METAL EXIT STAIR FROM 720WASHINGTON ROOF DECK

BALC

ONY

BUILT-IN COUNTER

BUILT-IN COUNTER

BALCONY ABOVE

SKYLIGHT ATPEDESTRIAN BRIDGE

18' - 4" 13' - 1" 19' - 6" 15' - 11" 19' - 10" 11' - 10" 6' - 0"

104' - 6"

8'-8

"10

'-7"

8'-8

"

27'-

11"

37'-3" DIAGONAL EGRESS SEPARATION DISTANCE

105'-9" DIAGONAL DISTANCE

LIGHT TUBES ABOVE

SMOKE GUARD

825 KEARNY (ADJACENT BUILDING)

UP

BRIDGE

STAIR 2

DN

1' - 2"

STORAGE

WASTE PIPE LOCATION

OPTIONAL PLATFORM

A3.1a1

A3.1b

2

1A3.3a

1A3.3b

A3.1c

1

A3.1d 1

(E) RETAINING WALL

12

A

D

35678

C

B

4

STAIR 2

CLASSROOM #1

CORRIDOR

TRASH

LOUNGE

CLASSROOM #2

GAMES

SLIDING WALL PARTITIONS

SKYLIGHT ABOVE

LIGHT TUBES

BALCONY

PROJECTION2' - 6"

BUILT-IN COUNTER

BUILT-IN COUNTER

BRIDGE BELOWSMOKE GUARD

22' - 5"

8'-8

"10

'-7"

8'-8

"

27'-

11"

18' - 4" 13' - 1" 19' - 6" 15' - 11" 19' - 10" 11' - 10" 6' - 0"

104' - 6"

37'-3" DIAGONAL EGRESS SEPARATION DISTANCE

105'-9" DIAGONAL DISTANCE

SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE

2' - 8"

STAIR 1

RESTROOM - W RESTROOM - M

STORAGE

WASTE PIPE LOCATION

14'-

8"

A3.1a1

A3.1b

2

1A3.3a

1A3.3b

A3.1d 1

A3.1c

1

(E) RETAINING WALLBELOW

0' 2' 4' 8' 16'

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

REF. NORTH

Project Number




11/28/2016

1/4" = 1'-0"

A2.1b


AH

11/28/2016

1303

FLOOR PLANS - LEVEL 2 &LEVEL 3


RH / ST



EXHIBIT A

12

A

D

35678

C

B

4

BEDROOM #1 BEDROOM #2

BEDROOM #3

LIBRARY

LIVING ROOM

KITCHEN

SKYLIGHT

CLERESTORY ABOVE

LIGH

T W

ELL

ROOF DECK

BALCONY

TRASH

TRELLIS

GREEN SCREEN

PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE BELOW

PROPERTY LINE

27'-

11"

8'-8

"10

'-7"

8'-8

"

LIGHT TUBESSMOKE GUARD

TREE PLANTER

STAIR 2

STAIR 1

5'-7

" EAS

EMEN

T

WASTE PIPE LOCATION

SHELVING

14'-

8"

2' - 6"

18' - 4" 13' - 1" 19' - 6" 15' - 11" 19' - 10" 11' - 10" 6' - 0"

104' - 6"

A3.1a1

A3.1b

2

A3.1d 2

1A3.3a

1A3.3b

A3.1c

1

A3.1d 1

DIAGONAL DIMENSION @ 40' HT

85' - 10"

80' - 11"

BUILDING SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE2' - 8" ROOF DECK

18' - 4"

(SEE 6' FRONT SETBACK)

21' - 0" (19.5% PARTIAL REAR YARD)6' - 0" (5.5% SETBACK IN ADDITION TO REAR YARD)

12

A

D

35678

C

B

4

LIGHT TUBES

LIGHT WELL BELOWROOF DECK BELOW

OPENTO

BELOW

CLERESTORY ROOF ABOVE

27'-

11"

8'-8

"10

'-7"

8'-8

"

18' - 4" 13' - 1" 19' - 6" 15' - 11" 19' - 10" 11' - 10" 6' - 0"

107' - 11"

OPEN

SOLAR THERMAL PANELS

EXHAUST VENTS

TRELLIS

STAIR 1

1/4"

/ 1'

-0"

1/4" / 1'-0"

1/4"

/ 1'

-0"

BALC

ONY

BELO

W A3.1a1

A3.1b

2

A3.1d 2

1A3.3a

1A3.3b

A3.1c

1

A3.1d 1

BUILDING SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE2' - 8" ROOF DECK

18' - 4" 6' - 0"(5.5% SETBACK IN ADDITION TO REAR YARD)

1/4" / 1'-0"

1/4" / 1'-0"


21' - 0" (19.5% PARTIAL REAR YARD)

0' 2' 4' 8' 16'

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

REF. NORTH

Project Number




11/28/2016

1/4" = 1'-0"

A2.2a


AH

11/28/2016

1303

FLOOR PLANS - 4TH FLOOR,ROOF


RH / ST 1/4" = 1'-0"LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLAN1

1/4" = 1'-0"ROOF PLAN2

EXHIBIT A

LEVEL 10' - 4"

LEVEL 10' - 4"

LEVEL 211' - 10"

A

LEVEL 324' - 2"

LEVEL 436' - 2"

ROOF46' - 0"

DCB

825 KEARNY ST LEVEL 211' - 2"

SIDEWALK0' - 0"

825 KEARNY ST BOTT OF TRUSS19' - 8"

RECESSED BALCONIES

CORNICE OF ADJACENT BUILDING PROJECTS INFRONT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY.4TH FLOOR ROOF TERRACE IS BELOW CORNICE

RESIDENTIAL ROOF TERRACE

-

RECESSED RETAIL ENTRYW/ BULKHEADS &

TRANSOM WINDOW,CREAM COLORKYNAR FINISH

PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE CONNECTS 2NDFLOORS OF 825-827 KEARNY ST.

"RAIN SCREEN" MINERAL CLADDING SYSTEM WITH OPENJOINTS, SCALED TO SIZE OF BRICK COURSING OF

ADJACENT BUILDING, TYP., CLAY COLOR

825 KEARNY STREET(SAME OWNERSHIP AS 827-829 KEARNY)

831 KEARNY STREET(ADJACENT CONTRIBUTORY BULDING)

ORNAMENTAL IRON BALCONY RAILING RELATES TO (E) NEIGHBORINGCORNICE, MUTED BURNT SIENNA COLOR KYNAR FINISH

(SEE 3/A5)

827

5' - 0"

8' - 8" 10' - 7" 8' - 8"

+38.11'

BELT COURSE

3'-1

0"9'

-10"

12'-

0"12

'-4"

11'-

6"4"

8' -

6"10

' - 1

0"

EASEMENT

MAIN ENTRY

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

EXIT GATE FOR 720 WASH. ST

A3.1a3

STOREFRONT MULLIONS,MUTED CREAM COLOR (TYP)

HAND-PAINTEDSTREET ADDRESS

BUDDHIST ICONOGRAPHICPATTERN ON RECESSED FASCIA

SUBJECT PROPERTY 827 - 829 KEARNY

A3.1a2

829


45'-

8"

RECESSED ORNAMENTAL IRON GATE

CLERESTORY49' - 10"

(+38.53')

6" ROOF CURB (TYP. @ PERIMETER)

LEVEL 10' - 4"

INTERLOCKING CIRCLE PATTERNS

0' 2' 4' 8' 16'

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

Project Number




11/28/2016

As indicated

A3.1a


AH

11/28/2016

1303

EXTERIOR ELEVATION -KEARNY STREET


RH / ST 1/4" = 1'-0"KEARNY STREET ELEVATION1

3/4" = 1'-0"ORNAMENTAL ENTRY GATE ELEVATION2 3/4" = 1'-0"

ORNAMENTAL RAIL TYPICAL ELEVATION3

EXHIBIT A

LEVEL 10' - 4"

LEVEL 211' - 10"

12

LEVEL 324' - 2"

LEVEL 436' - 2"

ROOF46' - 0"

35678 4

SIDEWALK0' - 0"

OPEN OPEN

BRIDGE

(E) METAL EGRESS STAIR

3'-1

0"9'

-10"

12'-

0"12

'-4"

11'-

6"

18' - 4" 13' - 1 1/16" 19' - 6" 15' - 10 15/16" 19' - 10" 11' - 10" 6' - 0"

107' - 11"

ADJACENT SOUTHPROPERTY PROFILE

BUILDING SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE

2' - 8"

STREET TREELOCATION SUBJECTTO CITY APPROVAL

BRIDGE SKYLIGHT

CLERESTORY49' - 10"

RAIN SCREEN

PLASTER W/ CONTROL JOINTS

LOUVER @ ELEVATOR SHAFT

PLASTER, TYP.

6" ROOF CURB


0' 2' 4' 8' 16'

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

Project Number




11/28/2016

1/4" = 1'-0"

A3.1b


AH

11/28/2016

1303

EXTERIOR ELEVATION -SOUTH PROPERTY LINE


RH / ST

1/4" = 1'-0"ELEVATION AT SOUTH PROPERTY LINE2

EXHIBIT A

LEVEL 10' - 4"

LEVEL 211' - 10"

1 2

LEVEL 324' - 2"

LEVEL 436' - 2"

ROOF46' - 0"

3 5 6 7 84

ROOF STAIR55' - 0"

18' - 4"13' - 1"19' - 6"15' - 11"19' - 10 1/4"11' - 9 3/4"6' - 0"

104' - 6"

11'-

6"12

'-4"

12'-

0"9'

-10"

9'-0

"

54'-

8"

CLERESTORY49' - 10"

RAIN SCREEN


PLASTER, TYP.

GREEN SCREEN


6" ROOF CURB(TYP. @ PERIMETER)

0' 2' 4' 8' 16'

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

Project Number




11/28/2016

1/4" = 1'-0"

A3.1c


AH

11/28/2016

1303

EXTERIOR ELEVATION -NORTH PROPERTY LINE


RH / ST

1/4" = 1'-0"ELEVATION AT NORTH PROPERTY LINE1

EXHIBIT A

LEVEL 10' - 4"

LEVEL 211' - 10"

A

LEVEL 324' - 2"

LEVEL 436' - 2"

ROOF46' - 0"

D C B

8' - 8" 10' - 7" 8' - 8"

EASEMENT

5' - 0"

9'-1

0"12

'-0"

12'-

4"11

'-6"

27' - 11"

EXISTING RETAINING WALL

45'-

8"

GREEN SCREEN

TRELLIS



LEVEL 436' - 2"

ROOF46' - 0"

D C B

8' - 8" 10' - 7"

0' 2' 4' 8' 16'

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

Project Number




11/28/2016

1/4" = 1'-0"

A3.1d


AH

11/28/2016

1303

EXTERIOR ELEVATION -WEST


RH / ST

1/4" = 1'-0"WEST ELEVATION1

1/4" = 1'-0"ROOF DECK - WEST ELEVATION2

EXHIBIT A

LEVEL 10' - 4"

LEVEL 211' - 10"

12

LEVEL 324' - 2"

LEVEL 436' - 2"

ROOF46' - 0"

BASEMENT-9' - 8"

35678 4

SIDEWALK0' - 0"

ROOF STAIR55' - 0"

5'-2

"3'

-10"

9'-1

0"12

'-0"

12'-

4"11

'-6"

10'-

0"

RESIDENTIAL

CLASSROOM

RETAIL

BASEMENT / BIKE STORAGE / GAS / ELEC

GREEN SCREEN

SKYLIGHT

(E) RETAININGWALL

TRELLIS

PROPERTYLINE

80' - 11" (75% PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE @ 1ST LEVEL OF DWELLING)

PROPERTY LINE

BRIDGECONNECTION

LIVING ROOM

CLASSROOM #1

WARMING KITCHEN BANQUET

RETAIL STORAGE

LOUNGE

7"

CLERESTORY49' - 10"


21' - 0" (19.5% PARTIAL REAR YARD)

BUILDING SETBACK FROM PROPERTY LINE2' - 8"

107' - 11"

BACK

LOT

ELEV

ATIO

N

3'-1

1"

6' - 0" (5.5% SETBACK IN ADDITION TO REAR YARD)

ROOF DECK

18' - 4"

6" ROOF CURB6" ROOF CURB

0' 2' 4' 8' 16'

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

Project Number




11/28/2016

1/4" = 1'-0"

A3.3a


AH

11/28/2016

1303

BUILDING SECTION -THROUGH RETAIL ENTRY


RH / ST

1/4" = 1'-0"LONGITUDINAL SECTION THROUGH RETAIL ENTRY1

EXHIBIT A

LEVEL 10' - 4"

LEVEL 10' - 4"

LEVEL 211' - 10"

A

LEVEL 324' - 2"

LEVEL 436' - 2"

ROOF46' - 0"

BASEMENT-9' - 8"

DCB

825 KEARNY ST LEVEL 211' - 2"

SIDEWALK0' - 0"

825 KEARNY ST BOTT OF TRUSS19' - 8"

825 KEARNY ST BASEMENT-10' - 8"

ROOF STAIR55' - 0"

PEDESTRIANBRIDGE

LIGHT WELL

STORAGE TANK

(E) EXITPASSAGE TO

KEARNY

BIKE STORAGE

SEISMIC GAP0' - 8"

5' - 0"

RAMP

8'-6

"10

'-10

"

SKYLIGHT

EXISTING ADJACENT PROPERTY825 KEARNY

CLASSROOM #2 GAMES

BEDROOM #3

BANQUET

RETAILLOBBY

9'-0

"9'

-10"

12'-

0"12

'-4"

11'-

6"10

'-0"

54'-

8"

EASEMENT

825 KEARNY 827-829 KEARNY

6" ROOF CURB6" ROOF CURB

0' 2' 4' 8' 16'

Sheet Title:

Scale:

Project Title:

Checked:Drawn By:

Date:

Sheet Number:

Disclaimer:

Stamp:




Key Plan:

Consultant:


APN: XXXXXXXX

Project Number




11/28/2016

1/4" = 1'-0"

A3.3b


AH

11/28/2016

1303

BUILDING SECTION -THROUGH PEDESTRIANBRIDGE


RH / ST

1/4" = 1'-0"PERPENDICULAR SECTION THROUGH PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE1

EXHIBIT A

Solar Panels

827-829 Kearny Street Rear Yard Modification

Site Plan

1 November 2016

Stan Teng, A.I.A.





(720 WASHINGTON)



EXISTING BUILDING

(803-805 KEARNY)2 STORIES

KEA

RN

Y S

TR

EET

WASHINGTON STREET

EXISTING ADJACENT BUILDING




(728 WASHINGTON)

5 STORIES

EXTERIOR EGRESS STAIR FROM720 WASHINGTON ROOF DECK

ROOF DECK

EXTERIOR EGRESS STAIRFROM 720 WASHINGTON

ROOF DECK

(E) TOP OF RETAINING WALL


(32 WENTWORTH)

5 STORIES

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

PRIVATE PARKING LOT EXIT OPEN TO SKY

NEW 2ND FLOOR PEDESTRIAN BRIDGECONNECTING TO 825 KEARNY ST. & 720WASHINGTON ST. CHURCH

EXISTING BUILDING

(801 KEARNY)2 STORIES

Egress Easement from 720 Washington

Lt. Court

Stair Penthouse

Elev. P'House

Clerestory Roof

4th

Flr.

Balc

ony

Adj. Property Gate

4th Flr. Roof Deck

Trellis

831KEARNY

REARYARD

728 WASHINGTONREAR YARD

1

23

46 5

Project Vicinity Site PlanNorth

Subject Property827-829 Kearny

831 Kearny

720 Washington

728 Washington

825 Kearny

View Looking Towards the West from the Project Site at 831 Kearny Street

6' Front Setback from Kearny Street Property Line to Face of Bldg. at 4th Floor Balcony = 21% (174 Sq. Ft.) of Req'd. Non-Covered Area.

21' Rear Yard Setback from Rear Property Line to Face of Bldg. at 4th Floor = 79% (639 Sq. Ft.) of Req'd. Non-Covered Area.

21'-0"6'-0"

13'-10"

15

'-6

"

View Looking Towards the North from the Project Site at 831 Kearny Street

831 Kearny


4

831 Kearny Rear Yard

831 Kearny

728 Washington Rear Yard

728Washington

2Overall Existing View of Project Site and Adjacent Properties (Looking west from St. Mary's School)


720 Washington

728 Washington Rear Yard

825 Kearny

728 Washington


728 Washington

1

831 Kearny

728Washington

720 Washington

View Looking Towards the West from the Project Site at 831 Kearny Street

3

View Looking Towards the Northwest from the Rear of the Subject Property


831 Kearny

831 Kearny Rear Yard728 Washington Rear Yard

728Washington

6

View Looking Towards the North from the 720 Washington Street

831 Kearny



5

Exhibit "B"

Balco

ny V

ariance D

etail(O

ccurs at T

hird

and

Fo

urth

Flo

ors O

nly)

3'-0"

15'-0"

9'-0"

Max. 15' at Face of Bldg.

Max. 9' at M

ax. 3' P

rojection from

Face

of B

uilding

Max. 3' P

rojection from

F

ace of B

uilding

45.00°

45 Degree

Angle

to

Determ

ine

Proportional

Reduction

of Length

of Projection

"A"

Diagram

of Max. B

alcony D

imensions P

er Code

LINE

OF

PE

RM

ITT

ED

BA

LCO

NY

P

RO

JEC

TIO

N P

ER

CO

DE

12

A DCB

BALCONY

27'-11"11'-10"

6'-0"

14'-8"

2'-6"2'-0 1/2"2'-0 1/2" 10'-7"

"B"

Diagram

of Proposed B

alcony D

imensions V

arying from C

ode

AR

EA

OF

RE

QU

ES

TE

D

VA

RIA

NC

E (3

.125 S

q. Ft.)

(Permitted Length)

(Requested Length)

(Exceeded

Length)

(Exceeded

Length)

AR

EA

OF

RE

QU

ES

TE

D

VA

RIA

NC

E (3

.125 S

q. Ft.)

AR

EA

OF

P

RO

PO

SE

D

BA

LCO

NY

LES

S

TH

AN

MA

X.

ALLO

WA

BLE

PE

R

CO

DE

Exh

ibit "C

"

827-829 Kearny Street1 N

ovember 2016

12

3 54

WASHINGTON

6

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

1047 Grant Ave

12'-0" High First Floor

2

Full Building Width Balconies

677 Jackson

34

655-661 Jackson

606 Jackson

6

Survey of Chinatown Historic Area Buildings With Balconies Exceeding Planning Code Sec. 136 Requirements for Maximum Length of Obstructions Over Streets and Alleys

Project SiteApprox. Boundary of Historic Area

827-829 Kearny Street1 November 2016

1056 Grant Ave

1

11

933 Grant Ave

918 Grant Ave

12

843 Grant Ave

13

745 Grant Ave

16

10

919 Grant Ave864 Grant at Washington

8

Washington St. & Wentworth Place.

75

649 Jackson

8

79

17

757 Clay St.

18

65 Waverly803 Grant Ave

14

9

915 Grant Ave

11'-10" High First Floor

803 Grant Ave @ Clay

15

18

Exhibit "D"

+11’-10” LEVEL 2 (KEARNY)

DOWN

DOWN

827-829 KEARNY ST. ENTRY

827-829 KEARNY, LEVEL 2 (TOP OF 5” RAMP)

CHURCH FLOOR LEVEL

PORTSMOUTH SQUARE

BUDDHA’S UNIVERSAL CHURCH (EXISTING)

720 WASHINGTON

BUDDHA’S UNIVERSAL CHURCH (EXISTING)

825 KEARNY

PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY ON SIDEWALK

+/- 0’-0”+11’-5”

825 KEARNY, LEVEL 2

BUDDHA’S UNIVERSAL CHURCH (PROPOSED ADDITION)827-829 KEARNY

831 KEARNY

803-805 KEARNY

801 KEARNY

LEVEL PATH OF TRAVEL BETWEEN EXISTING BUDDHA’S UNIVERSAL CHURCH (720 WASHINGTON) & 2ND FLOOR OF PROPOSED BUILDING (827-829 KEARNY)10/21/2016

+11’-10”

+11’-5”

+11’-5”

1 November 2016

Exhibit "E"

1

3

54

WASHINGTON

6

Survey of Chinatown Historic Area Buildings With Ground Floor Height Less Than the Minimum 14' Floor-to-Floor Height Specified Per Code Sec. 145.1(C)4(B)

Project SiteApprox. Boundary of Historic Area

827-829 Kearny Street1 November 2016

8

9

2

ROSS

7

1056 Grant Ave

1

10'-6" High Ground Floor-to-Floor

1100 Stockton

2


1029 Grant Avenue

3


4

662 Jackson


9

728 Washington


8

615 Jackson St.


33 Ross Alley

7


22 Ross Alley

6


5

752 Jackson


Exhibit "F"