>> i am calling item number 10, p.o. number -- of appeal number 10-081 protest in the issuance to alter a building. we will start with the appellant or her agent and dow. >> i am a personal friend of the

architect and have had professional contact with the permit holder. this will not affect my ability to rule on this. >> i'm speaking on behalf of the appellant. i am her architect. she is appealing approval for neighbors proposed addition and the rescission -- the decision of discretionary review. the documents not considered are in two categories.

the document requested but not produced was a shadow study requested in the review of the proposed design. page 9 of the review is a copy of the notes showing that the study requested be provided. it would be helpful and clarifying where this will cast shadows. the documents are two sections of the san francisco general plan.

the policy says that it should reflect the natural slope of the hill. it appears that these documents were overlooked during a planning review. currently there are no policies governing solar access.

building construction was one of the most expensive the endeavors that humans undertake. this is expensive incrementally and emotionally. when we build in an urban setting, this is difficult for the neighbors and the property owners. san francisco as tools in place to make sure that what we build this the best it can be. some of them are overlooked in the review progress. we urge you to grant the appeal and a choir the planning department to review the project in regards to all of the tools that have been provided including the general plan. this is the best it can be for both the property owner in the neighborhood. thank you for your time and

attention. >> thank you for your time. as a property owner, i am of two things. i am owed a shadow study that was promised because i don't think that the planning commission really understood or looked at the impact.

>> you just reference this into the microphone and the other site will turn it on. >> this is 6 feet and 11 inches taller than anything else around.

this shows you how much taller it is then either of ours. basically, the commissioner said that there is nothing in which could be provided that was an equitable discretion to the project. i think that we either walk the

talk and look at these things or we say, now we have all of this stuff and we don't go on. i will lose a 40% of the energy i get from the sun. i respectfully ask that we look at the laws and get the shade steady. >> did she phot for the dr? >> she said that there is nothing that we have here in

which others are environmental -- she said there is nothing which can shape an equitable discussion on this project. that is what someone shocked me. >> i had a quick question that is based on something that you just said. you said something about the loss of 25%-40% of your energy. where did you get your figure? >> i came up with that figure from the pg&e website about daylighting.

>> do you have solar panels on your home that are affected by this development? >> no, i don't have solar panels. the project was severely impacted by this. in fact, i have a letter that they wanted me to read to you because they were talking about the remarks that were made. >> you don't have a report that would back up this loss?

>> i could get a report. the thing that will show it in this particular case it is a shadow steady which could be easily done with any modern program. that is really specific. that is the average. >> can you put the exhibit to up? >> i am not used to overheads.

i can take it out of the binder. this is the very front of my house.

>> we might have a better idea if you can show us the property.

>> are these the one that you reference to that are the clear story? it is this the window in the photo? >> yes. they cast a light in the living room. >> those are what you're talking about.

>> that is the outline of where the addition would be. as you can see, it comes right up. there will be no light. this is really large.

>> this is 15 feet with a minor pushout is to accommodate a stairwell. you need to know this said that from your house there. >> i think sacha this is more a around the range of 25 ft.. the floor that you see with the windows, that is just a bedroom and that is 10 feet by 15 feet. >> is this your room? >> no, that is the stairwell. that is pretty significantly.

>> miami house was built in 1912. this was built in 1961. -- my house was built in 1912. >> good evening. i am the home alert at 675 arkansas street. the design i submitted meets all the planning department regulations and this is more conservative than what is allowed. the planning approved the design

application. the planning department rejected the request for discretionary review. without any legitimate basis, the pill should be denied. it is argued that this is against the showcase review. this is impossible since we don't live in the showplace square. i might not have reviewed their >> plan, she said. she attached a different plan which she says is actable -- is applicable. this suggests that our homes are in showcase square but they are not.

if you look, this is above and to the left of our home. the plan also describes where it is and qualitatively, this is a warehouse in an industrial district has recently been developed. it describes this as a former light industrial area. by contrast, our neighborhood has no industry. there is not even a corner store within four blocks.

turning to the general plan and the renewable energy plan, these plants are implicated by my design. if my design was improper under the general plan, nothing could be developed in this city. as for the quotes that were taken out of context, i will say this. a solar permit was pulled several months after i said as pointed have an edition. months later, they tried to block my plan by saying that they had solar trains.

they claimed that my addition would impede their ability to ever put solar panels on their home. within a few months, they put more panels on the house. i asked them if they were aware of the approved plan. zine around this and put to the others in the house. when they talk to you about the equitable issues, this was about what happens when a neighbor has a solar panel already on their home or what happens when the timing is different? what would you do? what are the equitable considerations. this had nothing to do with access to sunlight and those comments are taken out of context. in this case, we have the east- facing facades.

you know what incredible sunlight you get. all morning, this is directly in the winter side. this time of year, this is casting shadows during the day to my house and not the other way around. this goes all the way to go west and sets. my house will not affect the light she is getting. for some parts of the year, it might move towards oakland rather than san leandro but this will go right over our homes, this will not have a significant impact on the light that she received and we are grateful for it. as for the question about the shade steady, there has been some misinterpretation about some conversations that were had. instead of telling an extensive

and unnecessary chatter a steady, the story did not reveal any problems with the shading for the very reasons that i described. this is facing directly east and west and this does not create a problem. miss von has said some things about the addition of fact in the neighborhood character and i will tell you that my home is the shortest home and what my addition would do would be 5 feet taller than her home. you can see that where i stand is actually smaller than the difference in my home. this was also set back 15 feet from the front and quite a bit more from the back. this will not be a monster home, this is quite a modest addition.

there has been alternate plans submitted. i would respectfully request that you reject that. she is asking the board to come up with a new set of regulations to govern our home and the city. if my plan can be blocked than any business owner does not have a prayer of doing anything with their property and that is not the way the public policy works in this town. >> there was mention made of a project in 2004 in your letter, could you talk about that for a second? >> with great sadness, yes. i bought his home in 2000. i believe there were a key homeowners that had the home. they did virtually nothing to the home. i had several outlets that were extra wide. you could run a hair dryer and a

microwave. you needed a new roof, new plumbing. it took me years to save the money to come in into a renovation. part of that plan was to also do a deck at the same time so i'd planned to do a deck. i would say that we had a quite nice relationship. i invited her frequently for get together is and this was a good relationship. as soon as i wanted to put a deck in the back of my house, that -- dramatically. she represented that i was building this without a permit which was erroneous. she called the planning commission to make a complaint. i was there the investigate -- today the investigator came. she took no