POTRERO BOOSTERS

NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
S E RV I N G

T H E

H I L L

S I N C E

1 9 2 6

The Potrero Boosters Neighborhood Association Development Committee will use the
attached guidelines as criteria to evaluate the projects proposed within the neighborhoods
served by the Boosters. Not all criteria may be applicable to a given project.
After having considered each criteria, the Development Committee will make a holistic
evaluation of the project, which the project developer should consider prior to a presentation at
a meeting of the Boosters membership. Please note that any comments from the Development
Committee are interim, and they may not by relied upon as indication of neighborhood support
for a project. Only the membership of the Potrero Boosters Neighborhood Association may
offer an endorsement of a project, and any material changes to a project made subsequent to
any such endorsement shall render the endorsement void.
Developers or project sponsors are asked to submit, in PDF format, available floorplans,
landscape plans, elevations, renderings, and any other representations of the building (together,
the Project Plans), along with a completed copy of the development criteria, at least one week
prior to meeting with the Development Committee. The Project Plans should have detail
sufficient for the Development Committee to evaluate the Development Criteria on the basis of
the Project Plans alone. Copies of the Project Plans will be retained by the Boosters, and will be
used for Boosters business (which may include, without limitation, distribution to the Boosters
email list and publishing to the Boosters website).
Developers are asked to complete the attached Project Cover Sheet, which should accompany
the Project Plans.
* * * * *

Potrero Boosters Development Committee

Project Cover Sheet
Project Address:
Project Sponsor:
Developer:
Project Contact:
Address:
Phone:
Email:
Architect(s):
Landscape Architect(s):
Assigned City Planner:
Lot Square Footage:
Square Feet of Built Space:
Residential:
Retail:
Office:
PDR:

75 Arkansas Street, San Francisco, CA

SF Bay LTD [to be master-leased by California College of Arts (CCA)]
Equity Community Builders (Development Manager)
Suzanne Brown
Equity Community Builders, 38 Keyes Avenue, Suite 201, SF CA 94129
415-577-3723 (mobile)
Suzanne@ecbsf.com
Leddy Maytum Stacy Architects
Cliff Lowe
Esmeralda Jardines
22,000

Public Open Space (Sq. Ft.):

Total Parking:
Residential:
Guest:
Commercial:
Car Share:
Total Residential Units:
Studios:
1 Bedroom:
2 Bedroom:
3+ Bedroom:
Total Bicycle Parking:
Residential:
Guest:
Expected Approval Timeline:

0
0

65,986
40,398
7,814
175

33 Units
3
3
0
27
124
120
4

Average Sq. Ft.: 346

Average Sq. Ft.: 620
Average Sq. Ft.: N/A
Average Sq. Ft.: 1388

Approvals Expected in Summer 2016

Date of meeting with Development Committee:

November 18, 2015

The undersigned acknowledges and agrees that (i) any comments from the Development
Committee are interim, and they may not by relied upon as indication of neighborhood support
for a project; (ii) only the membership of the Potrero Boosters Neighborhood Association may
offer an endorsement of a project; and (iii) any material changes to a project made subsequent to
any such endorsement shall render the endorsement void.

Signature

Suzanne Brown
Print Name

Principal

Title

Equity Community Builders

Entity

11-11-155
Date

Potrero Boosters Development Committee

Development Criteria
Development Criteria:

Comments:

1.

Is the overall project design sensitive to the

neighborhood surrounding the subject project?
Consideration will be made to neighborhood
character, scale, light, air quality, and vistas.

The project will be designed to fit into the scale of

the neighborhood.

2.

Is the projects massing sufficiently broken-up relative

to the size of its parcel?

Project massing will be designed to fit into the

scale of the neighborhood.

3.

Are there any hazardous material on site? If so, what

are they and how will they be remediated.

Hazardous materials assessment of existing

building is in progress.

4.

Does the project incorporate or preserve any

historic elements on the site?

The existing building on the site was determined

not to be an historic resource in the Showplace
Square Survey and is not proposed to be retained.

5.

Does the project incorporate additional family

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

Project is student housing, so design features such

as play areas are not included. There is a large
community room on the ground floor as well as
outdoor patio space. The project will incorporate
accessible design features. The large 4-BR units
could accommodate families should the project
ever transition to market rate housing.

6.

What is the percentage of 2 and 3 bedroom units in

the project (with the goal being at least 10% 3 BR and
an aggregate of 60% being 2 BR or larger)?

80% of units are 4 bedroom units.

7.

Does the project include onsite affordable housing,

and to what extent does the amount of affordable
housing exceed the mandate (with the Boosters goal
of at least 30% of units affordable)?

Project is student housing, so affordable housing

requirements do not apply unless the project is
later converted to standard apartments.

8.

Does the project include publicly accessible indoor

space?

Retail space will be accessible to the public. Also a

community room may be available to community
members.

9.

Does the project include publicly accessible open

green space?

None provided.

10. Does the project take appropriate advantage of its

zoning (e.g., urban mixed use) and its location to
activate the streetscape, engage the public, and
enhance street safety?

The project will take advantage of its zoning and

provide retail spaces at the ground floor with 17foot floor to floor height to activate street
frontage. Floors 2-4 will include residential units
up to the building height limit of 58 feet.

11. To what extent is planned commercial space

neighborhood serving, available for locally owned
business, or available for non-profits?

There is approximately 8,000 SF of retail space

planned. We will encourage locally owned
businesses to lease the retail space. CCA has
suggested that Arch move into the building (Arch
lost their retail space nearby and is currently
operating out of a small space at CCA). We are
also discussing a caf with outdoor seating.

Development Criteria:

Comments:

12. Does the project incorporate PDR space?

None provided.

13. Does the project include the maximum allowable

vehicle parking?

Because the project is student housing for CCA,

which is located within a few blocks, no parking is
provided.

14. To what extent does the project exceed the

minimum requirement of on-site car-share spaces or
otherwise support public transit?

The project provides no on-site parking for cars.

Students will walk or bike to the nearby CCA
campus.

15. Does the project take maximum advantage of bicycle

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

The project exceeds the minimum bicycle parking

requirements by approximately 60% There is
internal bike parking for residents and guests and
employees, as well as bike racks on the sidewalk
for visitors and customers of the retail spaces.

16. To what extent does the project improve the

pedestrian experience (where positive features may
include setbacks, sidewalk widening, plantings and
other greening, street lighting, benches, etc.)?

These features will be addressed in schematic

design but will likely include new street trees. We
would like to discuss this in more detail.

17. Has the developer coordinated with other nearby

developments with respect to the streetscape and
other features?

We have talked to and are scheduled to meet with

the developer at 88 Arkansas (across the street) to
discuss their design with respect to streetscape &
landscaping. We are using the same landscape
architect.

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

green infrastructure and energy efficiency (such as
with water usage and solar panels).

The project will be sustainably designed using best

practices for water efficiency and energy efficiency.
There are no plans for renewable energy on site.

19. Are the operational features (loading docks, garage

doors, garbage areas, loading zones, etc.) of the
project sensitive to the surrounding neighbors and
uses?

17th Street is seen as the main circulation street, so

loading and trash areas have been located along
Arkansas Street closer to mid- block. 17th Street
and the corner of 17th/Arkansas are proposed to
be fronted with retail.

20. Are utilities undergrounded?

Current power lines on Arkansas are above grade.

We will investigate undergrounding the power
lines.

21. Will the development participate in the financing of

the Potrero Hill Shuttle?

We are open to discussing. CCA will be master

leasing the building as student housing for their
students.

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

towards Boosters supported or endorsed projects?

The project does not at this time propose an inkind agreement but instead would pay its impact
fees to the City.

23. To what extent does the project hire local

contractors and workers at prevailing wages?

We have not yet gotten into this level of detail

with respect to procurement of subcontractors
but we are open to discussing.

24. What exceptions from the Planning Code are being

sought?

No exceptions are proposed.

Development Criteria:

Comments:

25. What outreach have you done with nearby

neighbors? What have been their concerns and how
have you addressed them?

We have met with J.R. Eppler & Tony Kelly from

the Boosters and Keith Goldstein from the
Potrero Dogpatch Merchants Association.
Concerns have been related to the type of ground
floor retail and connection to Jackson Playground.

26. Have you received a PPA letter from the Planning

Department, or a design review from the UDAT or
Residential Design Team? Please attach.

Yes.

* * * * *

DESIGN NARRATIVE
PROJECT:

CCA Near-Campus Student Housing

ADDRESS:

75 Arkansas Street, San Francisco

CASE NO:

2015-009928

BY:

Leddy Maytum Stacy Architects

DATE:

March 4, 2016

ARCHITECTS DESIGN SUMMARY

OVERVIEW
75 Arkansas is a new construction private mixed-use development designed to be leased long term by
the nearby California College of the Arts (CCA) as near-campus student housing.
SITE
The project site is at the northeast corner of the intersection of Arkansas and 17th Streets in the Potrero
Hill neighborhood in San Francisco. An existing, non-historic, one-story warehouse structure currently
occupies the site and will be demolished. The site is diagonally across the intersection from Jackson
Playground.
BUILDING ORGANIZATION
The new building is organized as a series of wings that connect to a central lobby and stair core. The
wings form a street wall on the two frontages and a perpendicular wing forms two courtyards at the
interior of the block.
UPPER FLOOR DESIGN
The three upper residential floors are designed as apartment style student housing. The typical
apartment includes a living/dining/kitchen room, four bedrooms and two bathrooms. Each upper floor
also contains a shared common room and laundry room. The central building core includes elevators
and a central stairway in a skylit lightcourt. The corridors that connect the apartments and core extend
to the building perimeter to provide daylight and views.
GROUND FLOOR DESIGN
The ground floor is designed for CCA student life residential activities and CCA related commercial. The
street frontages are lined with retail spaces that CCA intends to lease to tenants with business that
support CCAs mission and students (caf, art supplies, gallery space, etc.). The rear of the building is
divided into two courtyards that flank a flexible multi-purpose room for CCA activities. Utility spaces and
bike parking are located at the end of the building furthest from the street intersection. The bike parking
room capacity is sized to meet CCAs anticipated demand for their students. No automobile parking is
proposed.

STREET FACADE DESIGN

The design of the two street facades is a reflection of the upper floor apartment layout. Each apartment
living room has a projecting rectangular bay window. The bay windows provide vertical 3-dimensional
forms that subdivide the facades at intermittent locations and visually break down the building mass
into smaller more residential scale increments. A special corner bay window is located at the buildings
primary corner opposite Jackson Playground. Between the bay windows is a regular rhythm of bedroom
windows that are treated as punched openings in the faade. The second and third floor bedroom
windows are visually combined to express the middle floors differently than the top floor.
Two types of sun shading are proposed for the upper floors. Wood slats screen the face of the bay
windows. The orientation of the slats is different on the south and west bays to respond to the different
sun orientation. At the bedroom windows, perforated metal sunshades are proposed that also change
orientation to respond to the different sun exposure.
The ground floor street frontage is largely transparent with storefront extending between concrete
columns. The building entrance and retail entries are located below the upper floor bay windows. The
storefront walls are recessed back from the property line to allow for door swings and to provide relief
to the existing relatively narrow sidewalks. A larger storefront setback is designed for the retail entrance
at the street corner. Projecting metal awnings are proposed above the storefront to provide shade and a
pedestrian scale.
INTERIOR LOT FAADE DESIGN
The courtyard facades are designed similarly to the street facades. The faade siding extends around the
end walls of the wings on the interior property lines. These end walls are subdivided by recesses where
the interior corridors meet the exterior.

ARCHTECTS EVALUATION OF INTERIM CONTROLS GUIDELINES

1. An awareness of urban patterns, and harmonizes visual and physical relationships between
existing buildings, streets, open spaces, natural features, and view corridors;
The design responds to its location as a transition between the formerly industrial
warehouse area with large lots and the adjacent residential areas with small lots.
The building massing is subdivided such that it can be perceived both as a whole and as
multiple parts.
Building massing holds the street wall while providing relief at the ground floor from the
narrow sidewalks.
The commercial and student activity at the ground floor base is clearly distinct from the
upper residential floors.
The living room bay windows provide a varied architectural rhythm and interrupt the roof
line.
Prominent corner bay window and corner retail entrance respond to the street intersection
and the playground green space diagonally across the intersection.
Ground floor commercial frontage for multiple tenants and entrances will provide an active
pedestrian environment.

New rear yard open space anticipates future new open space from new development on the
block.
2. An awareness of neighborhood scale and materials, and renders building facades with texture,
detail, and depth; and
The overall building scale is consistent with the scale anticipated by the Eastern
Neighborhoods Plan.
Exterior materials are a blend of industrial character (concrete, steel, sheet metal) and
residential character (lap siding, wood).
Visual texture is provided by the lap siding, boardform concrete, and sun shading elements.
Visual detail and depth are provided by the bay windows, sunshade elements, and recessed
storefront.
3. A modulation of buildings vertically and horizontally, with rooftops and facades designed to be
seen from multiple vantage points.
Vertical modulation is achieved through the contrast between the transparent ground floor
and more solid upper floors as well as the treatment of the top floor windows as distinct
from the middle floor windows.
Horizontal modulation is achieved by the bay window and commercial entrances rhythm
and the exterior recesses at corridors.

ARCHITECTS RESPONSE TO PRELIMINARY PROJECT ASSESSMENT (PPA) DESIGN COMMENTS

The site, located in the Potrero Neighborhood and Eastern Neighborhoods Area Plan, is in a set of blocks
that contain both a mix of three-story residential and PDR uses. The nearby character is also mixed and
includes low-height warehouses, multi-unit buildings, and houses with wood-siding and bay windows.
The following comments address preliminary design issues that may significantly impact the proposed
project:
1. Site Design, Open Space and Massing. Consider locating the at-grade access to the courtyard
from Arkansas Street to preserve connection to future mid-block open space.
Response: An exit passage way is provided on the northern edge of the ground floor
connecting the rear yard to Arkansas Street.
2. Street Frontage. The Planning Department recommends reorganizing the electrical and gas
meters to provide more active uses at the ground floor. Additionally to support this intent, please
explore locating the transformer in a sub-sidewalk vault and, as a loading bay is not required,
consider street side loading. Consider recessing portions of the storefront to accommodate
sidewalk seating and transition space at entrances.
Response: The utility rooms have been reorganized to add a small retail space.
Response: The transformer is now planned to be in a sub-sidewalk vault.
Response: The loading bay has been deleted.
Response: The storefront has been recessed.
Additionally, per Planning Code Section 138.1, the Department will require standard streetscape
elements and sidewalk widening for the appropriate street type per the Better Streets Plan,
including landscaping, site furnishings, and/or corner curb extensions (bulb-outs) at intersections

(see Better Streets Plan Section 4 for Standard Improvements and Section 5.3 for bulb-out
guidelines). The project sponsor is required to submit a Streetscape Plan illustrating these
features, and the department will work with the project sponsor and other relevant departments
to determine an appropriate streetscape design. Standard street improvement would be part of
basic project approvals not count for as credit towards in-kind contributions.
Response: New street trees are provided to augment the existing trees.
Response: Bicycle racks are provided.
Response: The corner curb is extended as far as possible given site conditions.
3. Architecture. As the project is diagrammatic, the Planning Department has no comment on the
architecture at this time but recommends that the project express significant faade depth,
provide high-quality materials and meet the architectural detailing and character of the
neighborhood.
Response: Refer to Architects Evaluation of Interim Controls Guidelines above.