more people occupying that location. of course, there is always the parking and the traffic problems in the marina and right on that street. and hopefully there will not be any parties that are noisy, but that i can deal with. basically, that is it. thank you. thank you for your time. president olague: are there any additional speakers in support? i believe you are the spoke. >> my name is and need. i am the owner next door. -- is annie. i want to give an illustration on what rose mary just said.

you will be losing two sets of clothes that windows, the light well, in two sets of apartments. also the back windows will be affected as well. president olague: additional speakers in support? seeing none, project sponsor. >> good evening. i am the architect. the comments provided by you -- provided to you -- those comments do not run to the level of exceptional circumstances.

i am glad the neighbors were able to use my drawing to demonstrate. this building in the center is the one that is going to affect the property. the predominant nature of this block is three and four story buildings. when the buildings are paired, they share the light wells. this is what the rdt recommends. i never felt this was enough to meet the light, air, and privacy requirements of the next-door neighbors, particularly at 1450. i kept those points in mind as i was designing this building. "we have decided to do is match the light wells. furthermore, we take the light well that faces 1450 down to grade. that exceeds what is necessary. you'll also notice that the property -- their back wall and

the back wall of the proposed property is greater than 106 feet. that is wider than chesnutt or francisco street. here is a before and after shot. you will see a tall stand of trees between the properties, which further shields the buildings. here is a view from the neighboring property at the very back of their yard, where they have a deck. you can see the impact is minimal. not to the department point of view about this. the goal has always been to provide three family-sized units for this property. we know there is a big issue about the light wells and the care that has to be taken for them. there are sets of bedroom windows that are very important. the closet windows -- if they are using it for habitable

space, there is a life safety concern, which is beyond the purview of this commission, but i thought i would mention it. but the light well, we are making sure is plentiful in size, provides light and air for the neighbors, and that we put the bedrooms on the opposite side of the building and the glazing is offset and made with obscured glass. the result of dealing with the light wells is a plan that is more barbell in shape, with the bulk of the allowable building area is in the front and the back and we have a 15 foot wide building in the center. the department is recommending a cut of the building in the back, as shown in these diagrams, which would cumulatively reduce the building area of this building by nearly 25%. that is more than what special

use district's reduced buildings by. furthermore, what they are recommending is moving a stairwell from one end of the building to the other, which further reduces or square footage, because this wall is shorter than that wall, and therefore you do not have the kind of buildable area. this block has a variety of architectural styles, but we take cues from what it offers. some of those accused of that there are tall opening's with garages. there are days that are handled in a variety of ways. i particularly like this building, with its contrasting bay. a very simple form in the back with no noticeable cornice and its own hat. i acknowledge commissioners antonini and miguel, who pointed

that out to me and made concrete recommendations. this takes cues from the buildings on either side, in terms of the way the top piece of the bay is handled with the hat that responds to the other building. it makes a hybrid between the two. the windows play off of these windows at the same time. at the back of the building, i happen to be very familiar with bird-safe glass. the bays are pulled away from this building to retain the privacy. the effect on the side property is minimal. these dining room windows remain. i ask that you not take dr and approve the project without modifications. president olague: are other speakers in support of the project sponsor? seeing none, you have two minutes for a bottle. -- the rebuttal.

>> i will make brief, because we all want to get home. 85% of buildings in that area -- there are only four 40's story buildings. -- 40-story building. s. the roof decks are using over 55% of the available lot space. that is it. president olague: project sponsor? two minutes. >> one nice thing about this discussion is that it has all been very civil. we have had good relations and conversations with the neighbors. one thing i have to bring up with you is that this project was first reviewed nearly 16 months ago by the department. it has been a moving target. things were fine and then there were fine, and then it was not fine and things have to be redesigned, and then we met with

senior management and they took away a lot of the recommendations, and we agreed that this has to be a teaching moment for all of us getting guidance from the commission to clarify the needs of the rear yard. i just wanted to point that out. it exacerbates the situation for us. but thankfully we are here and it is in your hands. we would like to>> thank you. >> public hearing is closed. >> i think i agree with the project sponsor on this for a number of reasons. the first is that in terms of thus depth, there is still 106 feet between his proposed structure and the fact, but i

think the staff recommendation was going to bring him back to appoint where his death was about equal to the shorter of the two properties in -- his stepdepth was about equal to the shorter of the two properties. >> we did not think the fourth floor should go back as far as it does. we also wanted there to be a recess, and that is the extent of the reduction we want in the rear. >> even with the fourth floor, i think he makes a good point of the loss of square footage are bringing that back, but i know what your plan is. the other thing is i am happy

wis -- maybe there is a reason it should not be this way, but the entry is on the west side, so it would seem that would be a consistent place to put the doorway. >> they are creating an empty lot, and they are building the building from scratch. we wanted the penthouse on the least visible side of the building. when you look on the street, it is a prominent visual aspect, so our requirement was to flip that on the other side to reduce visibility. >> i think talking to the project sponsor, there are significant impacts on the rest of the plan, and from looking

at the picture, and i am not seeing everything, but all i see is the care of pets, and i do not see the stare penthouse -- hall i see in th -- all i see is the parapet, and i would think that as long as it is high enough, it would block off the stairs. this is a different angle. i am looking at one that was st. john, but i still think you can master it and not -- but was st. john -- that was straight on, but i still think you can mask this.

the project sponsor has done a good job picking up cues from the neighborhood, and we talked about this. if you went to slide a.1.g, it shows the buildings, and there are a lot of them that have masonry with stucco base, which is an attractive look, and it would seem it was wood siding. it is not stucco, and it is not masonry, but in any case, he captures that by having a contrast between the two, so i like about a lot, and i think it does need a few architectural things. almost every building in the neighborhood has a strong cornice, so i think it would help the design, and it could be a little more pronounced and put some molding around the

windows, but those are minor things. there are windows that are obscured or a couple of windows in closets. there were representatives, but we are talking about the walk- in closets that lose their windows. >> i do not know what is being blocked by the windows. we do not protect property line windows. >> i am not sure what it is. >> the light wells are matched who identically.

we also asked that they be sculpted to address the adjacent neighbors, so we have competing priorities, and we thought this was a good test case, matching exactly who, which negates the need to do sculpting of the reader. >> i would think it would, but i think if it is matched, you have probably have now accomplished what you need to do as far as bringing white into the windows of adjacent property. those are main feelings, and i think it is pretty good.

>> i have a couple of comments. he is a neighbor. he is around the corner, so i think he understands the area. we had a controversial project a few months ago. we had major discussions about the essential character of this neighborhood. what this project does for me is something interesting. this is an intensification, which creates all whole different set of considerations.

they say it does not have to come to the ground, but it does, because it is essential to have light come all the way down to the ground floor in order to eliminate the inside. the denser building is the best you can do, and you want to push both rooms to the end. you want to give them as much facade, because you are maximizing, and as they maximize the full whip of the building,

so notching out of the building we saw today is an issue in this particular case and would start to create some guidelines around approach prior -- around the prototype. it speaks about identification in a matter that is compatible as you detailed with the building but also with creating quality units winthin, so i commend the design suggestion. your i would love to serve just and we all sit together and talk about guidelines for these areas, and i am prepared to approve the drug to it without further ado and not taking its

as proposed. that is a motion. >> second. comissioner sugaya: i guess the staff wants a simple answer. the trade-off is light wells for the reader. it would seem because of the rather large white wells in the existing building -- light wells in the existing building, the fact of the project sponsor has nearly matched it in favor of using that as a trade-off. i do not know how many other situations we run into this issue, and if the project sponsor does not want to match the light well to that extent, but if this one goes, that is a whole different issue.

commissioner miguel:: i think it is an interesting situation. as to the comment of the majority of residents in the area having to bedrooms, i have never lived in that area, but i have many friends and visited their homes, and the majority were two-bedroom homes, but this commission has seen over the years and certainly in the current number of years there is a real push for people who want to read bedrooms -- who are three bedrooms in order to raise families. there is still enough to backyard for families without question. i appreciate the change the architect has made in the appearance of the front facade.

i understand commissioner antonini's comments on working with his apartment with more detail, but i am fully in support of what has been presented. comissioner antonini: i think as we are looking for a model, and we have a clean slate to work with, this concept is a good one. they have been doing this with victorians for a long time, and it seemed to work, because you need light wells in the middle. i am very much in support, and now he will work with staff and hopefully there is a possibility that maybe the cornice will match the stair penthouse a little better. there may be some way that

convened not worked out, but the moldings are things that can be worked out as we move along. comissioner moore: i want to make another comment about 12the light -- about the iight is you have adjoining buildings that will be affected, and i think that is unacceptable, so for this building to deal with this issue is commendable, and we should remember that next time around if someone tries to convince us a shorter flight -- lightwell is the acceptable, particularly when it comes to occupied rooms that face alight well.

commissioner miguel: i would like to thank the department for the question they put in front of us. we discussed design guidelines all the time, and they are always a bit interpret those -- interactive, but in this instance, i think it was an honest question that should come before the commission. we will not run into this every day, every week, or every month, but the concept is there to be taken into consideration, and there was a comment as to the small windows that appear in walk-in closets, and i have seen many that are being used as offices and bedrooms and

everything else, which are probably illegal, but if you have a walk-in closet, you need a light. >> the motion on the floor is to not approve the project as it has been proposed. on that motion salm? [calling votes] thank you, commissioners. that motion passed unanimously. we are now in public comment. >> is there any general public comment? simenon, general public comment is closed, and the meeting is adjourned. >> the meeting is adjourned in membory of caspar gas control

and eric. thank you. >> thank you.