their business. is that what we are dealing with? >> we are not here to fight about the operation of the business. we are not here to fight with employees. we are in favor of the employees. if we look at this proposed alternatives, the adjacent building, we are saying if you come to 25 feet here, you have a building that the average height will be approximately mid block units adjacent. you can see the building on- street -- on hyde street, they will be looking at a wall.

that is the most significant impact, but you are also hearing from the neighbors this is a neighborhood. it is people who live together. they really believe if you come together and have a design that works but also maintains some respect for the height of the adjacent buildings and allows some air for the height. >> i understand, but it looks as though you are doing -- you are bringing it well below the unit to the east, so they are not going to see their walled but the existing wall. they should be able to go at least as high-en as the next

building to them. >> that is much lower. >> they are already seeing those walls, and if they look far enough they are already seeing a 56-foot wall but at a distance. good >> i will tell you what the neighbors have told me, that most of this light comes from this direction, so the way it has been described is the bad distance from the wall allows a lot of leg to get in. if you're moving it against the wall it does have a dramatic impact. >> thank you. that is all for now, but i am sure some commissioners have some comments. commissioner sugaya: i have a quick question or observation.

commissioner antonini's question of rear yard is satisfied by the description of commercial space sitting above the first floor, and that is considered to be the rear yard, but that does not necessarily have to be accessible to the rest of the unit? >> in this case the rear yard requirement is just the depth in location to the level of the residential unit, so they do not necessarily have to have access to that level. it is the volume that needs to be provided. >> i have another question for the project sponsor.

this is a use issue you may or may not know the answer to, but commercial space to has access to this regard, -- rear yard, and you contemplate any restaurant use for this space? >> they were anticipating using it for blazing saddles back office operations, and there is no intention to use it as a restaurant. >> if it is going to be used as an office, is there a zoning issue? >> successor read to the retail space -- accessory to the retail space. >> in terms of the office space, it would be an accessory use to the retail space. if it was to operate solely as a

commercial office use, that is permitted in this district as well. >> i am not sure where the commitment -- the commission is going with this, but i have to ask a question. the residential uses include dining and kitchen, and above you have the bedrooms. you have something who labeled uas a suite. can you explain what that means? >> we have bedrooms, and there is an area that is a study. i can take go look at the drawing. >> there are two spaces. one is better no. 3. >> it is a non-suite with a

bathroom. >> with respect to reducing the height, you have a two-story living and dining space. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> if you fill that in, the building could slide forward by 20 feet. gooif you slide the entire bedrm wing over, it would effectively be putting the third floor to the top by 20 feet. good >> if we did that. one of the things is we have tried to give a good height to the retail space, so we have

compromise those as we have gone up. this entire floor has an eight- foot ceiling. commissioner miguel: this is a similar situation to what has come before us from time to time when there is a vacant lot, when there is a very slow commercial building in -- very low commercial building that has existed for a long time, and arguments are the same every time. they deal with light and air because there has been light and air for a century, much more than a normal building situation in send francisco in a very

dense city. we are dealing with views. are you have to do is look as the site and understand it. compared with the project formally proposed by someone else, it is lower. they have taken care of the penthouses, taken care of the sullen therapist -- of the parapet to reduce the bulk of the building. we often have discussions as to the heights of ground-floor retail, and certain ground-floor retail takes even more than

most ground-floor d tel requires -- ground-floor details. it really should go up to 1820, and as far as the architecture, i think using the materials of the area but doing it to the 21st century is perfectly in order. i do not want to emulate the 19th century all the time, but using materiality can work and works recently here. -- decently here.

because of the difference in the grave, i think they have taken that into consideration -- difference in grades, i think they have taken that into consideration, and they have compromised for this particular site. commissioner borden: it does seem like there was a disconnect with the project sponsor and the community. we always tell people to work with a community, and we are not saying you have to take their proposal, but the earlier you can get to people and start working with them, the better things cand be. it is always hard when you have a one-story building and are replacing it.

i think the building could be shorter. i do not think this is a solution. it looks like a squad building, but i could see dropping a few feet off the top of the building. get it just seems a little talk, but i think the project is pretty respectful. i just think it could be a little bit shorter. i know the neighbors have a more dramatic proposal. i do not think that is the right one, but the biggest problem is there has not been an open dialogue among people, and views are not protected. it is always shocking to find

views are not protected, but it is a commercial with 1 residential units, and they are trying to figure out a way to make sure everyone gets sued benefit while the project -- gets to benefit while the project sponsor gets to benefit. commissioner antonini: i would like to talk to the project sponsor's representative here again we have a lot of testimony from neighbors, and the fact there was not a dialogue. maybe you can describe what type of meetings you have and what really transpired. >> i will start. jeff was very aware there was a lot of concern with the project in this neighborhood, so they did purchase the property.

they went to the planning department and talk with the planners and ask him to discuss how they could adjust the project to respond to the concerns. they dropped the fifth floor. the reduced the units. they provided a parking space. they modernize the architecture. that is what they first presented, and they have responded to what all the good folks were talking about here again there were a number of the -- who were talking about. there were a number of responses were they said, take it lower.

between the increase ground- floor retail space, which is 10 or 11 feet, the floor and ceilings were at a point where you have 10 or 11-foot ground floor and eight or 9 feet of headspace in between, so that is why it has been difficult -- going much lower gets difficult, and that gets in the way of the project. >> i want to ask about the possibilities of the parapet. i assume for fire purposes it has to be there. but is not going to change anything. >> when asked about the height,

we have reduced it to 6 inches, so we are going to do a one-our roof construction, which is expensive. we have taken the staircase penthouse thoss and removed them completely. those are expensive things to do. good the railing system will either be glass or stainless steel cable, so it is as secure as possible. >> it has dropped from 40 ft. 6 from the front, and one would assume that carries out appropriately. it looks as though you have almost 56 feet joining the buena vista building, so you do not

start to go to the neighbor's backyards until you get there. >> this is a double or triple lot and moves back quite a ways. the north point a buildings are considerably far away, so on the hyde street elevation where to buildings are looking into our rearguar yard, and we have provd a side profile of how they look at our building, and it is very low. it is down at our garage lovell. >> you are saying there is only a part of the building that comes by far enough to block some of the light and air to hyde street neighbors.

>> the second is a full commercial building. there is also the residents. >> they have a pretty good separation already. they have 25 feet. >> it is more than that. we show the profile and how it relates. our two-story section is only four-feet above their rear yard, so our rear yards are almost the same level. >> has staff made comments?

in order to incorporate the changes, staff would invites you to incorporate those modifications to the project, as the plants do not currently reflect the situation. commissioner sugaya: we will take dr. you can elaborate when ms. avery ask you about fasthat, and i wod like to continue to work on the design of the front's assad.

the lower part is a retail commercial space. the upper floors are residential. they do not read residential to me, with legs have to work hard on the upper two floors. they are really glassy, which i know is 21st century. with some deference to the buena vista building and the buildings around the corner, not so much the commercial stuff down the street but something the garrido little more residential -- something that read a little more residential. i am not saying you should copy, but keep it totally modern, and i am leaving to the planning staff.

>> i believe the elevator penthouse would not be eliminated. good >> i think they are just being lowered. >> a penthouse would remain. >> i would agree with what is being done here. since you have this double high area in the front of the residents, it seems to me it would be easy to bring that down all little buit, and it does not have to be that much class, and it would be more respectful if we would do something with more break unlesick and less glass.

whenever can be done, continue to work with staff and the neighborhood to see if we can minimize the impact of about one house -- impact of that one house to try to look at the light and air situation, because that is the only one i see that has a huge impact. >> if you could call the question. >> i will try. my understanding is you have the motion to approve the project based on a number of things. private sponsors continue to work with staff. they are to lower the elevator penthouse.

they are to complete the modifications announced, and that is all i have. >> i believe the elevator penthouse will remain, but everything else was correct. >> and we are doing growth because fu-- the roof because the parapet is being lowered. >> [calling votes] thank you, commissioners. the motion passed unanimously. [applause] >> let's take a five-minute break. >> we are taking a five minute recess.