it's the first step, as far as i'm concerned in liberty hill getting together a fully compendious list of standards. this won't replace the city code. but there are items in the code about front setbacks. which are very clear and very explicit in that those are to be maintained and tearing those down or making them less attractive is a problem and it creates a problem in the historic district, it creates a problem for the neighborhood, it creates a problem for property values. i think that to say that these are temporary is rather strange because there's -- around the corner on guerrero street there's a front setback where all the trash cans are simply placed in the yard, in the front setback and that to me is equally temporary.

the point here really was if you're going to do a major renovation to the first floor of the building, there's an opportunity to do something which is permanent and which really meets the guidelines of the planning code about keeping the front setbacks clear and that's as far as i'm concerned, that's the bottom line. i think that should be done. i don't look upon this as a temporary structure. i look upon it as being a permanent structure because the opportunity now presents itself to do something because they're going to make a major renovation with the building, and it is not included in their proposal. thank you. >> thank you. are there additional speakers in support of the d.r. requestor? seeing none, project sponsor. >> my name is angela logan, i'm the project upon sor. -- sponsor.

the scope of the project is an interior remodel on the ground floor, the purpose of the project is to utilize the ground floor as part of the habitable living space for the unit above, where the homeowners currently live. the final configuration at the completion of the project will be two dwelling units on three floors of occupancy, there will be no work done in the top floor which is a different living unit. the work on the ground floor will include a new lowered floor to achieve the legal ceiling height, new interior walls, there's a wet bar included there and new bathroom, relocated laundry, a new open guardrail will be added to the existing young to provide for an open spatial connection between the ground

floor and there are no exceptional circumstances and the project is consistent with the planning department demrines. it has already been approved by the d.b.i. so their issues have been addressed in the plans as well. >> it's your five minutes, whatever you want to do with that. >> the question of the garbage can enclosure has been addressed through other authorities and through d.p.w. in the zoning administrator already and everywhere that this issue has been raised, the current trash enclosure has been found to be compliant and consistent with the code.

they declared it is compliant and after seeing photos he even asked nancy lynch to go into a physical inspection of the garbage can enclosure at the house, at the site and she declared it perfect and compliant. the issue has been addressed, which is why it's not included in our request. >> thank you. are there speakers in support of the project sponsor? >> my name is kitty, i'm another owner of the subject property.

i would like to say we are satisfied with what's been submitted in writing, what's been said by ms. durandet and i believe our project has been deemed exinet, we do not believe there's any reason to not proceed in fixing our basement. we are happy to answer questions you have or about the garbage, which is an unrelated issue, obviously mr. hoff map doesn't feel it's unrelated. i will reiterate we have addressed the garbage issue thoroughly, repeatedly, and our neighbor is still unhappy and has pursued complaints against us that have never ened up in a citation. -- never ended up in a citation. the enclosure is compliant, it's sturdy, it matches the house, it's not affixed in place, which is part of the regulation, he is mistaken about that. we have a good deal of neighbor support, including many people

on the block that's in your pact, since we put up the d.r. poster, i know you received further support, we're invested in our home, in our community, we raise a family there, we live a family of five in a two-bedroom flat in this victorian and we had always thought when we made the investment to buy the property and live there as a family that we could expand down when the time came that we could afford to do it. we think it is going to improve or property and there will be no adverse effect and again if you have any question -- thank you very much. >> are there additional speakers in support of the project sponsor? seeing none, d.r. requestor. you have two minutes. >> the project sponsor has made certain remarks regarding it

being approved by the department of building inspection but the thing is, is that the plans were not accurate and they were not complete. certain things that are very key to the project that were excluded and i think that they are excluded, at least in my opinion, i could be wrong, because they did not want the project to be crute niced any further than just simp -- to be scrutinized any further than just simply rushed through over the countier. the project is responding to a notice of violation. it is substantial to the building. it's a historic district an typically this type of project would not be provided over the counter. certain things were excluded, windows were just called existing that were not built very likely with permit. the electrical was not built with permit, a number of things were not done with permits. i think that's why it was approved by d.b.i. and things were changed in order to make

the project just kind of float right through. i'm an architect, i understand some of these issues and i've been in practice for other 20 years and i've done all kinds of projects all over the city, additions, renovations, restorations and typically, deform b.i. will scrutinize a project properly. i think in this case things were omitted. they were not able to do it. no pun intended, but garbage in, garbage out, to some extend. that's the main issue i have with it and the issue of the trash enclosure. when d.b.i. does do its investigation i think there will be many ramifications as well that will have an impact on this project that could possibly change it such as the means of egress on the third floor and the item regarding the back of the building being

unstable. >> thank you. project sponsor, you have two minutes, rebuttal. >> the project plan submitted, i'm sorry, angelo logan, logan designs, the project plans submitted as existing plans and as built plans were taken from current existing measurements, whether the window that's currently there was permitted or not that window belongs on the as-built plans and the existing plans and all of that is there. >> public hearing is closed. commissioner borden? commissioner borden: this is a classic case where someone needs a venue to vet an issue and this becomes the venue. what we're here to decide is whether there are exceptional, extraordinary circumstances relating to the legalization of the downstairs being used as part of the overall unit of the house. from the plans i've seen here,

this is the direction we often encourage, there's a lot of issues with secondary or illegal units and so this goes to correct that possibility and that's the direction that we tend to want to go into. and that's what the scope of this permit is about. you know, i'm sympathetic to the neighbor's concern about the garr banal and if he was just here listening to another application, it's a problem in the neighborhood, i have the same problem in my neighborhood, people are rifling through garbage cans late at night, steeling the -- stealing the trash and it's an issue that far transcends enclosed trash structures, so you know, i don't see any reason, first off, we don't have any jurisdiction over that. we can't require them to enclose it. if they were going to build it as part of the building permit, that would be a different conversation but they're in the required to do so. this is not a planning commission or planning

department issue, it's a d.p.i. issue. it would be more a planning department issue if they were building it as part of the home. i don't see any reason to not take d.r. i would vote to not take d.r. and approve the project as proposed. >> commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i agree with commissioner borden, this is a good project, it does utilize an unused lower floor and of course on the rooms down mate rick connects the two so at no future date would there be a temptation for an illegal unit down there if it was sold or anything happened to the owner occupancy. as far as the garbage situation, i sympathize with commissioner borden, i always have to run people who come onto private property, at my place, they're rifling through

and leaving big messes. so if there's a way to put a lock on top of the garbage to make it impossible for scavepjers get in there, that might be the solution to the whole problem but it has nothing to do with the approval of this particular thing. but i certainly can understand that it's an issue. >> commissioner miguel? commissioner miguel: yes, i guess what annoys me about this is there is no possible way this rises to an exceptional or extraordinary matter for planning. could be for d.p.w., could be for d.b.i., i dent set their criteria any more than they set ours. this is the wrong venue. what annoys me most is 50 hours of staff time. as to the liberty hill historic district, i have a very, very good friend who has lived there for quite some time, done

renovations, restored, in fact, a magnificent piece of property, i know that district fairly well, i understand your situation with trying to get garbage enclosures that will fit into a historic neighborhood and i also realize having seen the regulations from d.p.w. that they're pretty loose. pretty general. in certain instances. perhaps have a meeting with them and discuss what they think can be done within the liberty hill historic district. in fact, i would suggest you do that. as far as this is concerned, it's not a planning commission issue to me. >> commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: i agree, but i think it would be wise to have discussions within the neighborhood, mr. barbee, you can take this back to the association with respect to

having treasure enclosures and other things within the front yard setback. i know that currently there aren't any regulations but perhaps also the planning staff could begin to take a look at that. especially in historic residential districts. not to add more regulations on top of other ones but i can see where it can end up being a problem. although, as i understand the issue, since i don't live in a neighborhood that has trash on the outside, since all my trash is picked up inside the building because it's a condominium, even if there were secure trash enlow sures, let's say, on the outside, somewhere, whether in the front yard setback, along the side of building, whatever, it's my understanding that obviously you have to take those trash

containers out of there anyway and stick them toward the street because the garbage people don't have keys, well, at least, in this situation, to unlock all the enclosures and take the garbage out and put them back. they're going to get rifled through anyway, i assume and are being rifled through anyway. so from that standpoint, i suppose it would prevent some amount of problems if there was some kind of top and a lock as commissioner antonini was suggesting but in the long run it seems like a larger issue and so from that standpoint, and it's an issue that obviously that part is not even within our jurisdiction. but if somewhere along the line, the h.p.c. an staff could take a look at the issue of what really can be put in the front yard setback, that would be great.

>> commissioner moore? commissioner moore: taking what commissioner sugaya said one step farther, since we have changed how we pick up trash there is in this situation obviously the green pickup, which is very difficult, even in an enclosed building location, has created a whole set of new problems. the stuff stands around for three quarters of a week and then the composting bin, it's in the a composting bin, put that on the sidewalk, it raises another issue. i do think just to help the discussion, that will make a difference what we say today, we might have to talk to historic preservation commission and d.b.r. and we might have to reinvent some of the ways how it's done. in the end, i think it will be

of benefit for everybody, aside from the early morning noise when people throw the glass out into some truck. i think it's a reasonable request for us to take for that. >> commissioners, the motion on the floor is to not take deform r. and to approve the project. i haven't heard any change to that motion. on that motion, commissioner antonini. thank you commissioners, that motion passed unanimously. the pronl has been approved as proposed. commissioners you are now on item number 15. case number 2009.0906c, 34 to 36 pleasant street. >> i need to ask to recuse, i live within the distance that

does not allow me. >> move to recuse. >> i second. >> on the motion to recuse. [votes taken]. commissioner moore is recused. >> i'm rick crawford of department staff. this is a request for conditional use authorization for a building over 40 feet tall in a residential district. it would add two floors to the existing three-story dwelling creating a 45-foot, two-inch tall building where the height limit is 65 feet. it will increase the number of dwelling units from two to three. the project is within the r.m. 3 and 65a districts. they are reconsidering the plans to better meet light an

air requirements. the project sponsor has changed the project, including removing a deck on the third floor of the back so there's no need for the variance previously allowed. he's increased the front setback on the fifth floor, reduced the overall proposal and the neighbors are not happy with the project, it appears they mainly want to have the fifth floor removed and it appears to staff that their concern has something to do with views. the sponsor has modified the project to improve light and air to maybes but wants to keep the fifth floor to provide a dwelling unit that is in the size range with the dwellings on the two lower floors of the building. the department recommends that the commission approve the

project as the project adds one new dwelling unit to the city's housing stock and the project no longer requires a variance and complies with planning code. i am available for any questions. thank you very much. >> thank you. project sponsor? >> thank you for your time and consideration regarding our project. my name is alfonzo fostino, jr. and my family and i own the property in discussion. my sister and i bought the property for our mother to show our appreciation for all she's done for us. presently my mother and sister live there and after construction is completed i will join them. as a result from our previous hearing with you and our face-to-face meetings with the neighbors at their homes, we considerably scaled down our project by way of height, length, and width. our project falls within the guidelines set by the city and

conforms to a consistent look and feel for the neighborhood. before meeting with the neighbors at their homes, we put up the first set of story poles. after meeting with tim cullen an jennifer solomon at their respective rooftops and after meeting with the neighbors residing in the apartment builting on clay street, we modified our design and updated the story poles to reflect the new reductions in height, length, an width. in order to get to these new reductions, we eliminated my mother's senior citizen elevator, roof garden, and a variety of other design features to adhere to your recommendations and the recommendations of our neighbors. these adjustments are reasonable compromise that benefit my family and the neighborhood because jennifer solomon's investment rental property next to our property still has her view and tim

cullen's apartment unit across the street still has the majority of his view as photos will show. further mor, the present design minimizes impact to the property behind us on clay street my a techs will go through the design and technical details of the project and from a fiscal point of view, our project will create jobs within san francisco as we will be hiring workers in the san francisco area, who will be contributing to the city's revenue stream through increased property taxes and our project will increase the property value in the neighborhood. we hope that you will support our new design which has been created through our reasonable compromises based on your feedback and the feedback of our neighbors. thank you and i'm available for any questions. >> thank you. >> president olague an chigsers, my name is mahad

omazed, i'm the project architect for 34-36 pleasant street. i -- alfonzo has done a great job, he's doing all my talking for me but i'll tell you what we've done with the design with the neighbors since our -- since the last time we were here and my staff and others are here available to answer any questions. you asked us to come back withbility a project that had made reductions so what we first did was we removed the roof deck, we lowered the build big seven inches, which is what we could do by getting eight-foot ceilings and shortening the structure to the shortest we possibly could. we lowered the two sides by another foot and a half. and then eput up some story poles because one of the neighbors brilliantly suggest wed put up some story poles that you could take a look at. then we called the neighbors.

we got together with the neighbors and you can see, i really would much rather have the photograph closer to you but i'd like everybody to see it as well. this is a composite of a photo taken from tim cullen's rooftop and tim lives directly across the street from our building at 34 and 36 pleasant street and you can see the story poles, i'll point them out to you in a second. this is our story poles. and our addition. we had a conversation with the large amount of neighbors on tim's roof, then we moved to jennifer solomon's roof, the neighbor to the left of ours at 40 pleasant and her roof deck is directly next to our project. we from there moved to, and i don't have any photographs

because i couldn't take any from her roof but she may have brought some of her own. then we went to see the folks at clay street. the neighbors that i met, some of them just wanted to see peace in the neighborhood and that is just great and we'll do whatever we can do. the clay street neighbors have a tight-knit block an their light and ventilation should be considered because they're the ones affected by this. for the others, we look for good neighbor gestures. we went back and reduced and removed again. i do argue that we made good neighbor gestures. we took off the portion of the addition that is closest to ms. solomon's penthouse on the left. we took it out. we lowered the -- we lowered the rest of the left side addition to conform with the slope of the steps. and we lowered the rooftop on

the right-hand side even though tim who is on the -- who is in the brick building on the right side really has no view or even light issues. but most important, we took three and a half feet off of the back of the building. we took a -- we took 3'2" off both floors, took the back balcony off we had on the third floor and in that way, i think we got a great deal of additional light and ventilation. we had a shadow study done. it shows for eight months of the year there's no impact on the back neighbors. for the other four months there's a slight impact on the back wall during a few hours in the day, it goes from november 21 to february 21, it foes from zero to impact -- from zero to impact to zero again. i have the shadow study for your review, i brought a copy for everyone and i can answer

questions. we sent emails to neighbors to comment, i suspect -- i know they're here to speak out. as tim said, there's no -- at no point did -- despite the fact that we tried to call the folks on clay street their didn't return our calls. we have a project without an elevator, with eight-foot ceilings, without a roof deck, we made our gestures. i asked you -- i ask you to approve the project as it stands. this is like dancing scorpions, i really like that comment in a horrible way. i have the chateau studies and in my two minutes and 30 seconds i'd like to use to rebut. >> we may have questions

afterwards. at this point, i don't think we do. so that being said, we'll open it up for public comment. is there any public comment on this item? you have to come to the mike. i don't have any speaker cards so. >> yes you do. sorry. >> we're amateurs at this. i have two handouts if i may give them to you, please. >> we did just get the speaker cards here, i apologize for that. >> no problem. i'm tim, i live across the street. i don't live on a rooftop, i live on a unit below, i don't have that great view he just showed you. i'm handing out to you two copies. last time we had 27 neighbors voice opposition to the project. one of them wrote additional

letters in addition to the ones i've handed out before. you have a pact of letters from seven to 10 of our neighbors in unanimous on sigs an a copy of a letter i emailed you all the other day. it adds one page at the end >> first of all at the last hearing, i want to be very clear about this, the neighborhood stood united opposition because it had an extra floor that we thought it was out of character and it severely compromised the backyard which was already compromised. commissioner sugaya commented it was too high. to add more bulk on top of that was a bad idea. and these penthouses that were being used as resident setting