there are several things that i'm particularly impressed with in the process of this project. i have seen a lot of properties developed. i think what's most important is that we've seen a lot of houses or multifamily properties that have been converted to single families or reduced down. instead has been brought out already is there is an additional unit added. i think it's done in a very careful and sensitive way to the billion -- building and to the neighbors. the other thing i want to bring up is i was here during the earthquake and worked in the marina district and saw a lot of buildings affected numerous buildings affected at that time. it's a difficult area and glad to see some buildings have had some retrofit done t building the

sponsor is retrofitting, she is not affecting any area of the street scape which i know is very important to the historic value of the street. i think the structural improvements are dramatically going to protect this building and the neighboring buildings. i do think the addition of the extra unit and these upgrades are going to benefit everybody and this unit as well. i think the addition of the penthouse on top which seems to be the main kerpt -- concern of the appellant is very modest. if the sponsor wanted to they could have put an additional story there. they have not. they are putting a very small reduced down to probably as low as possible penthouse that

would give access to the roof toop. the impact on the shade and shadow to the neighboring property is minimal. and the other thing i would commend the sponsor for doing this is going through the process of having neighborhood open meetings, knocking on doors, involving and including all the neighbors in this process. she went through that and without objection and to have an objection at the absolute 11 1/2 hour does bother me. i understand the appellant's concerns and i think the process has run it's course and she has done what she was supposed to do under the guidelines of good city planning. i think you should commend this and honor the appeal. >> procedural question. the family that lives across the

street from the project sponsor was here earlier. they left a letter. they wrote a letter to the board and we were hoping that her brother could read it to you. >> it's not in the record? >> not. she wrote it earlier. >> if it read into record? i don't have a problem with that. i'm fine with that. >> okay. thank you. >> c'mon up. >> is it under ten pages? >> yeah. hello, my name is david pres sta, i live at franklin street. my name is laurel fraser and i live across the street from the applicant. i'm in full support of the project. i'm an interior architecture at and received the plan and request denial of this appeal. this would only

enhance our street and neighborhood. thank you for your time, laurel fraser. >> thank you. >> is there any other public comment? >> seeing none, we'll begin our rebuttal with the appellant, 3 minutes. >> i'm not a troublemaker. i don't like making people upset and i don't like wasting time or money whether it's minor someone else's. i need to protect my property and the value of my property. i had no choice but to file this appeal. the expressed purpose, the expressed function of all the documents that i have received is to communicate to the property owners what the applicant intends do with this property. this document is riddled with errors. therefore

they are invalid and should be rescinded. what's the point of all these documents if they have errors on it. it seems to write what you want and the permit be approved. the more problems i find with this document, the more trouble i find. here are good examples. this is a drawing and service two points that i want to make. first it's not to scale. the entire -- however, the height of the entire eight foot 9 inch roof extensions is a

>> -- this was before i submitted my appellant brief. this past sunday i noticed how to drawing of the top of the page showing the relative height of the buildings conveniently shows the three stories left on west side of the building. plus i noticed this yesterday when they wanted to add another wind ori for the interior and i already have no privacy and because i need to keep the curtains open. my

point is to illustrate how deceptive these documents are. i think most people would not have noticed the discrepancy. after all i caught them by chance at the very last minute and six months after receiving the document. i greatly appreciate the time and diligent effort that the board has conducted in approving my appellant brief and i look forward to the judgment in my neighbor to revoke this permit especially the extensions on the roof and the rear. thank you. >> thank you commissioners. i'm here on behalf of the permit holder. the appellant has

received significant notice throughout the process. this is the plan on the wall. even from the photo it's very clear there is a person standing. that was last march. miss pres sta did send the application to the pell appellant as well. what the department of planning asked to minimize the amount of paper go out, they request that you take the drawings and shrink them so they fit on a certain number of pages. this is where it looked a little odd at certain times because that's what the planning department requires you to do. that's exactly what's happened. since the dr filing period

elapsed the construction drawings drafted, both the planning department and the dbi have received them and found them to be compliant with the code. i want to mention there is no window proposed for that wall along the appellants property. it's not permitted by the code because it's on the property line. so in the end the appellant waited 2 days prior to the appeal and responded to all the of the modifications that he requested. because he didn't file a dr request she found comfortable to plan the drawings and was surprised when she got the appeal two days before the appeal period. she was willing to listen to concerns. one of the things

that miss pres sta did want to propose was it was create twog creating two walls and she was still willing to incorporate that into the design. in the end this process is going to createnew family size dwelling unit. the recently adopted housing element of the general plan has a clear policy to develop new housing and encourage the remodel of the new housing. new multi-bedroom is expensive and that creates a more affordable family housing. it's three units with open dedicated buildings. >> thank you. mr. sanchez,

nothing further. the matter is submitted. >> a lot of things were brought up, but i think the primary issue with the appellant has to deal with the stair to the roof and the stair penthouse. looking at the orientation i would have guess that the blockage of the sun occurs relatively late in the afternoon. given that the penthouse is almost directly due west of the appellant's property. which means the southern sun is what provides most of the light and sunlight into rear yard and will

continue as it tracks across the sky somewhere late afternoon where the penthouse will have any impact on the supplement. -- sunlight. at that time the sunlight is very low on the horizon and as was stated by a number of people, i find the impact here is modest and minimal. i think the appellant should accept the offer of the permit hold er to put glass in the stair and enhances their stairs and will add a little bit of transparentcy and light through that wall. >> i agree. i don't have anything else to add.

>> me neither. i think the only thing i was concerned about was the light as well the technicality and any concern about clarification can be questions on the plans, at this point should have been rethe light issue, i don't think is of great concern. i think that i would move to deny the appeal and uphold the permit on the basis that it's code compliant. >> do you want us to condition the lazying in the stairwell? >> the appellant doesn't care. you have to come to the microphone, sorry. >> the only issue is that it would require additional time to be spent on the construction

drawings. >> as far as the revision. >> exactly. >> unless it's done tonight. i don't think the appellant cares. i saw you shaking your head. so, again you need to speak in through the microphone, sorry. >> the shade expert that the permit holder hired showed with the glass it would cover the shade would be two or three hours per day. that's what we went over on may 3rd meeting with both architects. in fact, the architect asked him when they saw that i wasn't very happy with the shade because it was more than i was originally expecting. my guess was like an hour of shade with the penthouse there which is you know the sun is due west so it creates towards their shade

area two or three hours and the architect requested to add glass instead and i said that is the glass, 2-3 hours per day. >> the question is should we condition the permit to have the glass be part of stairwell, the penthouse? it's glass or solidwill have a choice between the house? then it's glass. but i would prefer none. >> okay. thank you. >> yes. >> i just want to point out, i'm not sure if that construction in the last wall of the property line if it would require the wall for fire rated. >> it's an excess of 3 1/2

feet. it's a double run on the stair there. >> so, do you want to -- >> let's proceed. >> no amendment to my motion. okay, denial the appeal and uphold the code compliant. >> okay, we have a motion from the president to deny this appeal and uphold the permit on the basis that it's code compliant. on that motion, commissioner fung? aye, hurtado? >> aye. commissioner honda? aye. the motion is approved. the permit is upheld on

basis. we are adjourned. thank you.