>> 454 greenwich street. >> good evening, planning staff. the project before you proposes that one-story horizontal extension to an existing partial third floor of a single family residential structure. it would expand 24 feet closer to the yen witch frontage, and would leave a setback to the front of the building. a new roof deck is proposed and

would be situated on the roof of the newly configured third floor. an interior remodel, window rio window replacement and stucco replacement would occur. the site of the mid block and front ans on the street measures approximately 17 feet wide and 0e feet deep. the subject building has a three-story structure that occupies the entire area of the lot and contains a single family residential dwelling unit with two off-street parking places. the structure constructed in 1928 has been determined to be a historic resource by the department. it was reviewed by the residential design team. they reviewed it and determined that is does not have adverse impact to the light and air.

impact to light are not exceptional and extraordinary, due to the sol lar orientation of the d.r. requesters third floor roof deck and third story. the d.r. requesters third floor roof deck has direct southern exposure and are expected to continue to mid-day light reception. private views are not protected by the planning code. under the commission's pending d.r. reform legislation this project would not be referred as this does not contain or create exceptional circumstances. i'm available for any questions. >> thank you. commissioner olague: d.r. requester?

>> i'm mark zucker. i'm the adjacent neighbor at 444 greenwich. i'm also a design professional and design custom homes all over. i have a lot of expertise in this matter. a little history on this property and my property. i purchased my home roughly 3 1/2 years ago. it was in dire need, everything needed to be replaced. the first thing that we did was to reach out to the neighbors and the telegraph hill dwellers and understand the neighborhood and the intent of the neighborhood and how -- how things work. and what people's expectations were. based on that, i worked backwards. as the -- as a result, i maintained the integrity of the home. 1908. we kept the entire building envelope intact. we didn't go up or out. we worked within our envelope to

preserve the height to our neighbors, including the neighbor next to us who is proposing push out. 18 months ago we completed the renovation. the photos i prepared illustrate that. my problem here is a proposal -- i looked at item 10, there was an impact. this is a significant impact, much more than that. we're talking about a 24-foot projection over my courtyard -- an additional 5 1/2 feet of vertical height. two feet of the structure. 3 1/2 feet of railing for the roof deck. i just heard in the last report that glass railings may not be allowed on a property line. it may be solid, which would further impact my light. this is about our south light orientation and exposure. plain and simple.

we a garden and a living room. and as the photos illustrate and i will walk through briefly that -- that -- that -- our light is significantly impacted, the photos i took were at 2:45 in the afternoon. this is by no means late afternoon sun. what i like to do now is walk through the photos on here this is what the patio looks like in the current state. if you look at the first line, which is here. that's where the structure is supposed to go up. the second is where the railing would go. this is a huge -- this is the next page, page two, which is not very clear. this illustrates the shaving participate, we marked up what

we thought was the building height. it is two feet higher. we illustrated that. we're showing the shading regardless -- that dotted line indicates the shading, which means we would be blocked of southern exposure by 2:45 in the afternoon. next photo illustrates our living room and the light that we enjoy currently. it is a fairly -- it is -- the reason why we bought the property was for the southern exposure, for the height. for the openness. if you look at the next pain, we indicated -- we used roughly 60% of our solar access. this window would be completely blocked with the proposed construction. if you go to defwren witch. and i really took issue with this, the staff, i don't think they had full understanding of this. hime showing in black what you

would see from standing on greenwich. this is standing in the street, on the middle of the street. it is significant impact. it would be all glass. it would have nothing to the with the architectural of the street. it would take away from the historic commitment of the street in my opinion. finally, the last couple of items, i want to show essentially, this is what i would look at from my patio which is essentially all of my plantings would -- would need to be turned into with face plants. then i'm showing a glass rail which i'm -- i'm still in question if the rail is even legal based on the fact it is on the property line. >> okay. illustrated -- here. where we're standing than 0 our patio and illustrate the significance of the wall. adjacent to -- to it with the railing. and this is directly south. south west.

finally, you know in terms of outreach, i did reach out to this neighbor. we had one meeting. there was no feedback. he didn't reach out to us we reached out to him. i couldn't help myself -- as a design professional, i could force two alternative design concepts for him to show that you could easily achieve what he wanted to do on that third level without expanding to the extent that he did. i showed an eight-foot extension and proposed he did a roof deck at the lower left which wouldn't impact the neighbors, particularly me. i couldn't get in feedback, we tried to work and i couldn't get a dialogue. i put together two proposals, one showing a master suite. where did it go? anyway, my feeling is -- that -- that this home at 3,000 square

feet exceeds the general size of the homes in the neighborhood. it is a single family home. there are multi-family dwellings but this is a single family home. i feel it is putting a huge impact on my property. and i would -- i would really request -- i would like it if this cob pushed back to the discretionary review where we could work together and solve the problem. he sexressd to me, he didn't have the -- he expressed to me he didn't have money to go back to the architect. i said i would do it for free. i design for people all over the country. i would design for free and work with him to get something more appropriate for the street. that's pretty much all i have to offer at this point. thank you for listening. >> we'll hear from the speakers in support of the d.r. requester. >> good evening. my name is mark.

i own the property at 37 telegraph place, which is directly behind the subject property. i also received the initial letter about the project and did myself outreach with the sponsor and did meet with the sponsor to -- to address my concerns, which were similar but somewhat different. my particular case, the -- the roof deck in question, i had some issues with -- with -- with because it faces into my bedroom. basically the same level. i pointed out to the sponsor that i thought this roof deck was extraordinary. being about 600 square feet. then i didn't know they built the deck that large but perhaps you can. i asked for forbearance from him and understanding. in addition in the drawing you have seen, the thing that i was given as a neighbor, they have the placement of a rooftop

heating and air conditioning unit which would sit on the roof in front of the window of my bedroom. and i asked about noise and -- noise mitigation. and -- the sponsor, mr. kennedy -- he seemed to understand -- to understand the issue and said perhaps he might mitigate that by moving it further away. his point was to speak with his architect. it wasn't a great concern. in the moving of it, he didn't have a problem with it. the noise of that is a huge concern to everybody there. particularly since -- about as far as i am from you. i'll be sleeping there. those were my issues. one further exceptio those were my issues. one further exception. when i looked at the drawings and i contacted mr. kennedy in -- the sponsor's architect. i brought his attention to the deck which i thought was larger than required was also shown

sitting -- sitting on the surface of the roof. since this building la a wall around it and it butts under buildings and you'll have to have one hour fire protection against those other buildings, you would have -- and three feet high, you would of course have to do something to support the weight of the deck that is proposed. to support that weight and that 1357b of 17 feet was going to require some structure underneath. there by raising the height of the deck and the wall, et cetera. >> so, when i spoke with the architect, he seemed to indicate it wasn't an issue. i asked for a -- i asked for a section to examine, he said, he wouldn't -- he couldn't be bothered with it, it was too expensive. i hoped that i was -- i would hear from the architect or the sponsor at some point. this was what our arrangement was regarding these issues.

i'm not unsympathetic to -- commissioner olague: thank you. any additional speakers for the d.r. requester? no. project sponsor? >> good evening. i'm the project -- i'm on the project. i would like to -- i would like 0 to respond to com pents. first of all, regarding the railing, we did talk about that. what i believe, if i use one-hour roof and the railing is not, is not -- it should be all right. well used to, we have -- we have five -- a wall which actually i think -- i think couple of projects before us, we talk about the wall going to -- too bulky from the lighting.

that's why we want to use grass -- and one of the roof. so, we want you to have -- [unintelligible] that's my answer. i didn't know he was asking for special fashion on -- to answer that. i thought i answered that one. for the -- for the setback, actually, i think you might have these pictures. on the -- most of the beauty is actually, is -- is without any setbacks. all of those buildings, four-story, five-story, no setbacks. and some of them, recently developed, like these. and these ones have little setback, probably three, three foot or five foot maximum. so that's why i actually in the beginning, with -- with the project, we get to have a

setback on the top floor. but after we talk to them and we received comments so with the setback actually now it is 20 from the front wall. so, we think that is actually these buildings for -- for all of those new developments, these buildings is going to be -- to have maximum setbacks for the whole block. and also for the roof deck -- actually, you could see from here, a lot of them have the roof back if the air, and also these ones. these bullpens -- these ones and the others have the roof decks. i don't know -- they probably have a setback and some of them have grass too.

what we trying to do is do the roof deck. i didn't know this was a concern to -- to c.b. and i just heard from a couple of projects before this project. a and of course, rear -- actually -- actually -- in the drawing a-4 we have -- we have -- we -- since we received the call from neighbors about the privacy -- concerns, we -- we change the reading back to -- back to the rear wall of the stair. it is 17, 6, step back -- set back from the rear. we keep people walking closer between the two buildings. so we skeep 17 step back if the roof debt and we keep -- we push the unit as much as we can to the back it our side.

so trying to -- to be back to the neighbors. that's -- that's all i can see on that. if anybody want to ask any question, they can. >> commissioner olague: thank you. >> the speakers in support of project sponsor? seeing none. d.r. requester, you have two minutes. >> thank you, i would like to point out a couple of items. first of all, with respect to -- to the planning staff, in fact, nobody from planning staff walked to the upper property for solar impact. they have up at the patio level and that's where the significant impact is on light. i think that's very important. i did have a person from staff come after all of it. after all of the dust settled, a

few planner and he was definitely understanding. he said we had to go through the process. then he understood what i was talking about when it came to solar impact, which was really not factor ifed -- factored in properly ahead of time. in addition to the project sponsor, you know -- there -- i can't see any roof decks from my patio. i have one at the second floor roof deck. i could see one in the distance. there's not a abundance, and certainly hot the size and magnitude that they're talking about. i know we're not supposed to talk about with privacy. i know is -- it is -- >> we frequently sleep -- where we sleep is a huge privacy issue in addition to it is a solar issue. and with regard when you show the streetscape from my house down, the four houses down below are all smaller scale homes.

they're all set back, they're all treated differently than the homes above and across the street that are multi-family homes. i think we're prying to preserve this historic -- we're trying to preserve the historic nature on the hill on the street. thank you so much. >> thank you. project sponsor? you have twoant mr.s. >> i think we only have one -- one d.r. requester. project sponsor, you have two minutes. >> i guess i'll let the professionals talk for me. but i want to go back to the beginning of the thing. >> state your name? >> i'm tim kennedy. okay. this -- mr. decker -- mr. beck bought the house next door to me. i immediately went and met with him in person. i -- i showed him my plan aths -- i showed him my plans and

took him to my house. i told him the plans. he said at that time, i won't oppose you. i proceeded. essentially, mr. becker is going to lose his view. the building is directly across the street in front of him. my place is right over from the building. it cuts out his light. i agree. when i told him the man, he said that's the case, that is what you're going to do, then i'm going to do the same thing. he didn't want to go through the process i been through. i've been working on this since 2007 and they fought me at every turn. i think we have a brilliant design. i think it works well with the neighborhood. in fact, i think it would be a big a asset. i -- i -- i told you, he said he didn't want me to look into this

bedroom. i offered to build a wall. that would prevent that from happening because this -- his -- his room is right across -- the alley. as far as the -- the air conditioning, you heard two different people telling you i don't care where the air conditioner is, so long as it is working. however, he likes to move it. essentially that's it. >> thank you. >> public hearing is closed. commissioners, sugaya? commissioner sugaya: i have a question for staff. on the first page of the drawing set that we received, there's -- on the site plan, it shows that the subject property is -- is -- is -- about a half a block deep if you want to characterize it that way between greenwich and

telegraph place. if you look at the photo that staff provided, is that where your house is? yes? there's an aerial here that sew shows the subject property facing greenwich and then a building in back of it. >> if you look at the subject property, the sponsor's property, at the rear of the property, you would be -- you would be -- telegraph place. >> right prp >> so msg rt -- >> so moving north directly behind is my property. >> is there any -- are you right up against each other there? there's no backyard. >> telegraph place is probably 20 feet wide. it is an alley street. the back of the subject property is on telegraph place. >> very good. thank you. then the -- the site plan is drawn