there. it's an open courtyard. there is a sunscreen or wind can khan pee that projects out. canopy. you can see at the bottom of the dark horizontal line represents a setback from the face of the building. the existing home as i mentioned is only the bedrooms and they are located on the ground floor. with diagrams here is the flow

of circulation up to the 2nd level. that is stepping through the garage and up the existing stair to the second level which is the location where we intend to build, reconstruct the maids room and expansion to the bedroom. we want to simplify the internal circulation which is indicated here. by doing so we remove the stairs. you see the two small horizontal arrows so that we have internal circulation up to our bedroom on the second floor. also in the central courtyard we are indicating the amount of

private open space. this shows the view from sea cliff and --el camino and del mar and the maids room. this is the proposed view with our addition. as you can see it's quite modest. it's the extent of the building mass that would be seen from the same way at sea cliff and --el camino and del mar. finally with respect to the neighbors on 20th avenue, we can get into more details about the numbers of the discussions we've had with them, but in the upper diagram or photograph we are showing the existing condition, the edge of the current second story maids room. you can see a little patch of blue ocean. with the original idea of our

addition we suggest that we had considered a shed roof which is a pitched roof that you see in the center photograph. we also were concerned about responding to neighbors concerns about the stairwell which you see sort of the vertical slot. just to the left of the shed roof. so we hide some views where the major concern of the neighbors. we lowers the height of both the stairs and of the roof itself over the bedrooms. so there is a flat roof. this is the view of one of the neighbors second story bedrooms and as you can see the line of the roof is in alignment with the horizon. so my question how much light is

being affected when the top of the roof to the buildings is actually at the horizon line. this is a section through the addition of the upper right. we are pointing out the area of the existing 2 story, to the left of that horizontal black bar, you can see that there is a lower roof line and that's the roof over the stairway and to the left is the bedroom which pops up as it provides a break in the massing. you can also see the outline of the neighbors next door and that our roof is below the top peak of the roof of the next door neighbors. >> i am going to break at this point for abby. you know what,

sorry, i will add. okay. i will add that the new addition will not alter the character defining feature of the u shape and the courtyard will be maintained. these are distinctive elements noted in the evaluation issued by the city. in fact the historic resource specialist that reviewed our plan and signed off on it is that it's the only location for expansion. we also want to be sensitive to the environment by creating a green roof over a portion to capture rain water. i will be please today answer questions later. >> hi, commissioners, good

afternoon. i'm abby snooer, i have been involved on community outreach with projects. even though we have yet to move into our home, 3 of our --el camino neighbors support our project. our immediate neighbors who are very sympathetic to our goals. they know how important it is to renovate for a modern lifestyle. we have had two official meetings with our neighbors. the first one on september of 2011 after which we started our process explaining going through the process on this complex site as to how to move forward. it took a long time for the zoning administrator and we knew how

to proceed and from that point we had to go through historical resource evaluation. after all of that we submitted our application in december of 2011, however we did not actually post the notification until december of 2012. that was a long period of time where we were working closely with staff here to make sure what we were designing worked with parameters and guidelines and codes that was given to us. in the meantime, as well, we were asked by the neighbors to deliver drawings and we explained that we were in this process. there were several e-mails that will a test to this. they still asked joe butler to get the drawings for them and in january of 2012, joe butler verified with us that he was representing the

28th avenue neighbors and the drawings were given to him. i would to call --el measure who has been helping us. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm an architect and applicant for the project. i would like to say that i responded to mr. butler's request and at the direction of the property owners transmitted property drawing to mr. butler around january 2012. i just want to clarify that. thank you. >> two highly recognized designers in the city support us. and bob who is also a sea cliff resident of over 30

years. we also have the support of two of the neighborhood associations as was stated earlier. i thank you for your time and i will answer any questions later. >> thank you. >> thank you commissioners, as you can see from the proposal it's a relatively modest proposal and there is a reason for that because abby knew that they were one with the historical resources that were going to apply a lot of restrictions and what they can do here. yes, we are aware that there were neighbors that were going to be sensitive to any projects they approaches. this is the result of being aware of those restrictions. the home adds 515 square foot. this is the existing home and i would like to point out that there is clearly quite a large front setback at the beginning of the front of the lot. and then again we've got the small addition here, very small and visible from the street. there is a height increase of just 2

feet and maintains it's 2 story character which is in a neighborhood of both two story and three story buildings. as a point of comparison it currently and will maintain the lowest floor ratio area on the block. now, the project will also have extremely minimal impact of light on the requested properties. as we discussed four of the properties are at least ninety feet away and this is another good picture. to give you an idea of how small this impact is going to be from that distance. and one of the things that this picture does not show is that as part of the project, this tree is being removed and in fact the rear of the existing building is actually being about 3-4 feet is being removed off the back end of the building. the stairs. that gives you an idea that it's going to open some more sight

lines there as well. the closest neighbor is 25 feet away. any privacy impact on the neighbors is going to be minimal. obviously we are dealing with a situation when it's considering the number of windows facing john abby's home. they have incorporated slot windows which are going to be replacing large windows. it going to improve privacy in that sense and then screened with landscaping. one of the things i also wanted to mention is that the deck is setback 10 feet from the property line and there is no expansion of this building moving towards the property line. it's currently a roof and the roof is being converted to that deck. it's a small deck area. 13 by 8 feet. this is not where you can have a backyard barbecue. this is

where you can have a cup of coffee. more as jean has mentioned the planning department has given us very direct guidance that any additional changes to the building is going to have a negative impact. this is what we are limited to since it's an historic nature. we have an exterior stair to access the small bedroom. this is going to help it function as a 3 bedroom home. thank you very much. >> calling speakers in favor of the project. fisher, stanford, >> good afternoon, i'm peter

win kel scene. i'm here for the planning negotiation. i have reviewed the project and been all through building in our opinion the addition is minimal and minimal impact on the neighborhood and we recommend that you not take dr and prove the project as shown. thank you very much. >> i'm here to give my perspective nor for the

project. pet trees loved oh. when 535 on --el camino sold we were happy it was purchased by the snaers. with were happy they did not turn the house into something it was not meant to be. being sensitive to its architectural design of the house. we have seen the plans, have seen the drawings of the addition. it will beset back from the street and have minimal change to the facade of the house and entirely in keeping with the existing architecture. we support the project and look forward to

having them move in as neighbors. >> thank you. any other speaker in favor of the project sponsor? >> my name is stanford. i live with my wife in the property next door to the building. we are in support of this program of this development. when i heard mr. williams and mr. butler describe this project, it was hard for me to recognize it. mr. williams wants to demolish it and mr. butler wants to make it into a museum. we don't think either of those are appropriate. the change to this the building is very minor. it covers, it affects us

directly. we have two windows that would be blocked by this new addition but i have been in the development business for real estate for over 30 years and i know that there are adjustments that need to be made when a person comes along to accommodate a property to their needs. this is a very minimal accommodation. they have been very open with us. we've learned of their plans early on. they showed us their plans several times and they have made some modifications to discussions that have gone on. i don't recognize the complaints of the other neighbors on this project. we very much support it. >> thank you, any other speakers in favor of the project? okay. seeing none, dr request ors, you have rebuttal.

ors, you have rebuttal. >> thank you. let me start with the visibility issues. pushing this addition 25 feet forward is going to end up with an impact at --el camino and del mar. and you have seen this plan. that can't be accurate shfrm -- here is what it looks like now. you can see it clearly. it's going to come forward. it's higher and going to come forward 25 feet. so the visibility is the no. 1 defining criteria of that story. the view of the addition is just not right. this is not

an under sized how was. this is larger than 4 of the neighbors house. 3200 square feet. the structure down the south property line was part of the original construction and i submitted the article from the examiner which shows that this is how it will now be presented to --el camino del mar, it's going to be wider and taller. so it's our contention that you cannot change this particular site in this manner without affecting the resource. the change is minor, yes, it's a small addition, but it's placement where we think should be the rear yard. there has to

be some rear yard and no one has addressed how to rear yard is being addressed in this instance. we are asking to you look at the alternative. >> i think i have 10 minutes of rebuttal >> you have two minutes for rebuttal. >> thank you, project sponsor, rebuttal 2 minutes. >> thank you. to speak again to this historic issue. this is what the planning department looked at with 3 rounds with several revisions of the project. it's been very closely looked at before it got to this point. also with respect to the distance from the front property line. the new addition is at the property line. the

home is a comfortable home, they have children now and grand children coming and this is going to be a house where they can enjoy together. we have the lincoln house home owners association in support of that project. considering the arguments being made we just want to make the point that the planning commission is well aware, that nothing in the general plan or residential plan or any other of the policies protect private views which is a concern m this case. we with respect the commission not grand dr and prove the project. thank you. >> the public hearing is closed and opening it up for commissioners and comments. >> i had a question for staff to begin with. i think one of the dr requestors talked about

the rear yard. it appears there is a rear yard. i don't think it's not in compliance. i don't see the -- >> well, the question that was raised by the dr requestors is where we measured the dr from and in this case we relied on planning code d where it converges to a single point which in most cases results in a roughly triangular shaped property. that's how we measured the rear yard in this case. >> part of the existing building is within that required rear yard. it's a non-complying situation. they are not proposing to construct within that required rear yard. they are proposing to construct towards the front of that. >> my point is that this has

really nothing to do with it because what they are building doesn't make them no less compliant than what they are as far as the yard is concerned. i don't see that short of a demolition as moving it around makes it a possibility. >> i think staff said it the only possible sight consistent with the standards of trying to be compatible with the existing structure for the addition to be. i believe that was brought up in testimony. >> that was the opinion of our preservation staff. >> yeah. preservation. >> a couple other things, a height increase is proposed to be only 2 feet net and what has been reported as 25-35 foot separation between the neighbors properties and the house itself again. it's not bringing them any closer, it's only putting an additional

partial floor on the top of it. on top of the existing. it's not changing the separation. and i generally don't see anything extra ordinary or unusual, in fact the most impacted was one of the people who spoke in support of the project who would probably have the most impact even that impact they don't feel significant enough to take the dr. their views are not protected. i know there could be a possible instance where this addition might for a certain period change the sun coming in for one of the dr's request or's home. i think it's a very well designed home. this

is very appropriate where it is and it's been pointed out when it was built in '51 the builder was sensitive and kept it as a lower profile and this does not add anything significant to the height of it and actually protects all the neighbors and i also think it's very important when an addition is made it matches to the rest of the house and it's done. they are not putting something on it that looks like it comes out of 2013. it should look like it comes out of 1951, which it does. i don't see a reason to take dr on this. commissioner moore? >> when there are 5 dr's i assume this commission takes notice because there is something not in sync with the neighbors. but we use the power of discretion with discretion

exceptionally extra ordinary . when i look by at the department i have to conclude the project operates within the prevailing guidelines with the interpretation of a non-compliant rear yard which was built for compliance which exist for rules now. and furthermore we have many additions to buildings where since we could not deny that any owner cannot buy a property with restrictions for not being able to alter it, that is impossible in today's world that we have to accept where addition are appropriate and not appropriate. one of the things we mostly care about is indeed the view to the public side of the property and this is a very complicated one given

the majority of the facade stretches over the length of the property which makes it very difficult to find and appropriate place for addition. so putting the addition actually pulled back from the driver way which by itself does not have much expression at all, i believe that we are adding a property aspect if we take the fact that an addition is indeed permitted. the property is not asking for variances and all we need to look at the alteration are made appropriately and take care of did. i don't think we can call it an historic resource in a manner that makes it better and well maintained and proper buildings. i think architecturally the property moves forward in the 21st

century and emphasizes the strength of the home. we didn't buy the house and let it be what it is. i simply say that i do not see any ability to take the dr and i make a motion to prove. >> second. >> i agree with both my previous commissioners. on the dr requestors and all the comments of not receiving plans, it reminds me of projects that my firm has submitted to the city, architectural projects and indeed there is a long period of time in which you are dealing with environmental review and in this case, because it was a question raised about it's historic

significance that process took another path. we've gone down that path with the department. their intake meetings, there are other meetings preapp meetings, a host of things n a lot of those instances i think all of the neighbors may feel that there is something going on and progress is being made, in fact nothing is going on in terms of actual design. there may be preliminary designs submit but those are all subject to review at times but i think it's not -- i don't know how to put this. it's not a correct move to supply plans that may get substantially changed within the department and because of departmental suggestions and recommendation. i can't a test at test to the

time of this, but this kind of thing takes a year or two years or even more. we were stie mead in 2012 that we not move forward on a project because of some internal pending potential legislation that the department was considering taking to the board of supervisors to change some provisions for review. i can't talk about the project because -- i'm a commissioner and it's something that got submitted. so i'm not supposed to reveal the address. but in any case, so we held off with the developer for over 6 months and at that point it was what's going on and they said, well, nothing is moving ahead so you should now submit it. submitting it subjects you to environmental review and not just the intake review, not just the department considering ,