ability, the transit access. the plan also aims to resolve some transportation issues during your -- transportation issues. we have discussed plans for san jose avenue and other roadway improvements, and with 9000 transit riders a day getting on and off transit at this intersection, it is a very who pedestrian-focused area, so it emphasizes transit and movement theory goes -- and movement, and its location, and establishing connections as part of the park and creating new open space and improve the public's face in his downtown commercial -- public space in the downtown commercial area. this includes the information

and the technical documents. goothe general plan amendments include the new plan and the larger general plan, which we think is a great move. also, there are some slight language of days -- updates. the planning code amendments are focused on creating a new section, and this is focused on emphasizing the transit and pedestrian-oriented nature and changing this new zoning classification to recognize that. the other pieces are ancillary to that creation of the planning code peace, and the zoning map amendments include the new

commercial transit district, also the height of maps, and i will describe these briefly. we have existing zoning. also expanded the nine i additional properties. six residential buildings across from the heart station to allow the flexibility for future commercial -- from the guard station to allow the flexibility for future commercialization. in terms of the height, all of the height in the area is 40

feet. we are proposing a more sensitive interior at the intersection. we are proposing a height allowance. for us to include the new area of plan and a corresponding language in matp changes, this includes the district and various related section of the states to that, and the zoning map who arranges for the height of that, sir tonight we are requesting your approval, initiated the general planning and zoning map amendments

common and and we would like to move forward with scared -- zoning map amendments, and we would like to move forward with scheduling our adoption. we would be back here for the certification and adoption, so we are here to answer any questions, but we would like to formally request the approval of the resolutions. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. comissioner moiguel: >> i think the proof of what they have done here is the fact the public did not even have such confidence in the final product that they did not even have to come here. there was no one to protest, and they did not feel it was even

necessary, because it was so obvious on the face of the document that they did not have to come and convince us to do what we are here to do, so i complement year again, having gone not just on the commission's many years prior a number of neighborhood issues and plans. this is as good as anything i have ever seen, and with that, i would like to move to initiate resolutions and establish november 10 as the hearing dates for completion of this item. >> in second. >> commissioners, the motion on the floor is approval of initiation and schedule of

november 10. on that motion -- [calling votes] thank you, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously. park>> thank you. >> commissioners, you are on item number 15. gooa request for discretionary review. >> good evening, planning commissioners. my proposal is to construct a third story addition 10 and a half feet on the ground floor

and 6.5 feet on the second floor. good the addition will be set back 3 feet from the north side property line and 7.5 feet from the south side. this includes alterations. the planning department fined the project to be consistent with residential guidelines -- defines the project to be consistent with residential guidelines. there is no exceptional circumstances to merit changes to this project. the dr filar holds the adjacent residences to the north. this work will stop was the groundwork for a debt on the second level but can also

affect privacy and reduce exposure of sunlight to their patio. each of these concerns of proposed side-facing windows are small in size. the sponsor is willing to frost the rear part of the window to address his concerns, and who also, there is no debt on the front of the project, and of proposed expansion is not out of the pattern. three additional letters of opposition were received. these neighbors had concerns regarding privacy in the rear

decks. the planning department has determined the addition does not create significant impacts for the property for the reasons the department finds they do not have an extraordinary exception. that concludes my presentation. i would be happy to take questions by the commission. >> cr requester? -- dr requester? >> my name is kelly martin my husband and i have live in our house for eight years. the product being proposed is a very large project.

it proposes to nearly double the square footage of their house. we live to the north of the property. we have no objections to the addition. most of the addition. our objectives are related to three items. no. 2, of potential future deck on the front of the house and 45 feet of living space on the rear of the addition. the reason for our concerns are loss of sunlight and privacy. the windows significantly decrease the privacy of our house. the third story window shown here will have direct the use into our third story bedroom from 8 feet away. -- direct views into the third story bedroom from 8 feet away.

the shares the view from someone standing in the proposed window. this shows the view from the spot of the proposed window into our house, and this is the head into the bedroom. we have 180 degree ocean views from our front windows. the product sponsor will have the same view from his west- facing sliding doors. this picture is taken from our roof. the yellow out line shows the area that will be eliminated by building the proposed third story window it is in neighboring houses and our third story bedroom would be eliminated. the second story offers views

into our readers second story window. this offers views into our downstairs living space, patio, and second-floor bedroom from 3 feet away. as soon as the established for prince of our houses this breach -- now established viewpoints of our house is a bridge, and this reduces it. we thing most of these north facing windows are unnecessary and request they be eliminated for privacy reasons. the third floor at fission has a sliding glass doors leading to the roof. the roof is not shown on the debt now, but we have to take a long-term view and consider that

a property owner may wish to make this change. when we understand it is very easy to turn the space into a deck later, and we would have very little ability to stop it. if it becomes a deck, it will offer additional views into our third story bedroom, our second story dining area, and the living room from the project sponsor's house. it would be evasive, and we are asking for the prevention to prevent a flat roof from becoming a cadet. -- a deck. regarding item number three, it extends further east than in the house on the block. it will cast a shadow on our patio and the rear of our house. our house will already suffer a major loss of sunlight because

the third story addition will cast a permanent shadow on our skylights. also, it will cast a shadow hours earlier in the day, but we accept these as unavoidable. the added 6 feet of living space means our house and part of our rear patio will be in shadow by late morning or earlier. this is a major concern for us. this is a cold neighborhood, and patio is precious. we are requesting that if the fold in by 3 feet now so it extends no further. that is it for now. thank you for your time. >> other speakers who reported the are requester? no? the project sponsor?

you have five minutes. >> i agree with what she just said. we are on the same page. i did not design the debt. i do not want a deck. -- i did not designed the deck. the whole idea was being able to be upstairs and see nothing but what is in front of you. we have made changes to the property for peat and kellie. we have awnings on the back windows, and it was done in steel. we have no change all the railings to glass. i will do the glass railings. the window on the back, they agreed it would be frosted. it was always supposed to be

frosted. i've built the staircase you just look at 12 years ago, and if is a privacy issue. every time they walk onto their staircase they have a view into my backyard, and they understand that. on the back we had started before we did this thing. we intended on replicating that on the first floor. we are going to take the second story out, and he was really concerned about it, so we designed it. i do not know how much smaller we can make it without there being a room there, and if the room is gone, there is a deck,

and we are staring back and forth at each other. now the window on the top floor, you can only see in one direction, and my intention was never really did you have to stand in the window to look in theirs. that is kind of it. i guess you guys decide. >> are other speakers in support of the project sponsor? dr requester, you have two minutes for robot sold reduce for robots all -- -- 2 minutes for rebuttal. >> three of our phone calls went unanswered. the plants do not show the third story window, and thus the

planning department could not have been aware of the window on our privacy, and who plans for significant modifications was made after conversations with us is not the case. the current proposed plans are the same as the first plants we ever saw. they reflect the project as described to us, and no compromise has ever been made in response to our concerns. the project sponsor threatened to extend its after he understood we had of sections. the only thing he has offered us his last railings and the removal of the one evenin from e rear of the properties in response to our concerns and the frosted window, which could easily be changed back with over-the-counter permit. all of these could be changed back with over-the-counter permit. the three letters in support

from our neighbors opposed the rear of the filled out, and there are properties that have first story additions, but this is the only property that would have over your second story addition, and holing its thin by -- would have arear second story addition, and we have to choose between sunlight and privacy, and sunlight is important to us. i respectfully request removal of the windows stereo -- of the windows and of the rear second story addition is told by 3 feet -- pullback by 3 feed. >> you have two minutes for rebuttal. >> kellie is right about the 45 degrees in our house.

she is right about that. with regard to me pulling it in, she is right about that. the first set of plans is what you are talking about, but the second set of plans has to do with conversations i had with her husband. we were in the first stages of getting everything together when he talked to me, and that was the discussion. i do not know how much i can make which allow -- with that and still have the back of the house. good >> this hearing is close. comissioner antonini: i have a suggestion on the three items. the windows situation, we get this all the time, and we are in an urban area. we are going to have windows. we have to let light in.

there are shades or other ways to provide privacy. we cannot do too much about that, but you need to get light. on the deck in the front, i have a suggestion, and that is that every single house has a pitched roof, and yours does, too, and if you were to leave that or put that back after the addition instead of the flat roof, it would preclude the possibility of the deck. it would look better because it would fit in with the other houses, so i'm going to ask the other commissioners to think about an hour. it would not lock your view. it would be low enough so your windows would be above that in the way, and i do not know about the 3 feet in the back. it sounds like i would have to look at these others and see how it compares to the other

admissions in the neighborhood. if yours is typical, i would think that would be correct, but i would see with the other commissioners would say, but that would be a suggestion i would make. >comissioner sugaya: i think i o not have a clear understanding of houses for a pitched roof -- of how this front pitched roof works, but it will be in front of your view, if i am right. >> there are several houses up there. >> would you, to the microphone? >> there are several houses. i do not have a picture of the attire block, but there are several houses with the street fronts.

it is not uniform with statehouses -- pitched houses. >> can you put it on the debck? >> he says he is not going to do that. >> you could. there could be a process in which we do that. >> i am going to make a motion to approve the profit. we are going to have frosted windows in the back. we're going to take a out the window in the front. >> why don't you clarify exactly which window? >> 31 is on the third floor. 31 gets eliminated.

we are going to frost windows 26 on the second floor. goowe are going to put an nsr tt they do not have a deck on the third level and anything else. an nsr is a notice of special restrictions that will be recorded with the property essentially saying you cannot have a deck on this portion of the residentce. >> doesn't have to be forever? what if i sold my home. >> if you choose to have it removed, you would have to come back. >> is there any way to avoid that? if there is a restriction on my

property -- >> if the commission does not like it they do not have to -- >> i always imagined if somebody wanted if they would have to come before the commission for that. i could be wrong about that. new >> if someone in the future wanted it, they might be able to do it as an over-the-counter permit and not come to the commission. with the in a star, they would have to come to the commission. -- with the nsr, they would have to come to the commission. >> this is a cloud on the title in? >> is a restriction. it is a restriction like any

other issue. >> it is not uncommon to have nsrs on properties. the deck could be approved over the counter, so there is no way your neighbors would bhave any way short of filing to block it. >> i thought that was the outcome. >> they could do that, but then it is on them, and that is something they would have to renew every year. >> this is not part of the motion, but commissioner more was pointing out you could rotate, put a window facing east on the third floor around the corner from where currently the

frosted window is. it would be narrow and tall. if he wants to do it, i do not think there is any harm to the neighbor, because it is facing east. >> if you look at it, it is very deep with no additional windows, so there would be side light coming from the east, and i think that would not completely make this room dark, and even though the narrow side lights can be very affective, we are still giving lights into the room. >> he could change those plans.

>> let's wait until they finish their conversation. i guess we can call the question. >> the motion is to approve the project with the elimination of window number 31 on the third floor, a frosting of windows 26 on the second floor and requiring a special restriction that no debt is to be built on the front of the third floor. [calling votes]

that motion passed unanimously. you are now with the general public comments. >> if there is not any general public comment on an item that was not on today's calendar. seeing none, the general public comment is closed and the meeting is adjourned.