offer no less quality. >> i talked to some people in the industry, and i could not found any of what you are trying to do. small businesses are commenting on the fact that few people in the neighborhood would really take their dogs down there, because nobody thought that was really the right setting to drop off your dog or pick it up in the evenings. the one question which would be my closing question, who in

their right to mind would want to live in a residential building with that many dogs in the basement? >> i think you have to questions. the other is about the viability of the business. i think our target market will be people who work in the neighborhood and the expanded neighborhood, which does include the financial district and the embarcadero. it is a difficult neighborhood right now, but people go to the golden gate theater, and people

will park their car in the garage. i am hoping they will do the same thing with the dog spirited region with the dogs. the other thing is about being in the building. now i am almost finished and should be moving in next year. it was fantastic. there was concrete everywhere. that was there from before.

>> thank you for your comments. vice-president olague: it was around the new ways. the dogs on the ground floor. >> the people working there do not want it. it drives them nuts. if the dogs are barking, the employees go nuts. if the dogs keep barking, you hose them down. i was reading hosing them down

is very affective. >> they would be walked obviously. they get stimulation from walking in the neighborhood. we will be doing the walks. >> when i talk to people in the neighborhood, they were concerned about cleanliness. >> just like the other dog day care, we will be cleaning up.

we will get some of the dogs out, but most of them will be staying inside the facility. >> commissioner horton. >> do you really plan to have 60 dogs? >> that is the maximum. i do not think we will have that many. i think we will probably have more like 40 or 50, although we may take a stand and say the other dog day cares are doing this. let's undercut and to have its price, and will hire more people. -- to half the price, and we will hire more people. >> i was intrigued by this code. this is a dog day care, but it

was determined we would not use the code, but we would instead use the code for animal hospitals. i did not understand the rationale and where we came up with the definition of 12 dogs. and why we have decided to reclassify the project. >> we do have definitions for animal hospitals and clinics. gearein 2007, the zoning administrator reviewed the code, and determined a dog day

care was similar enough that he determined it was the same kind of use and went ahead and split it into two sides, and of a smaller family dog day care spher-- and the larger one thats more than 12. it was his determination, because it was not in the code. >> i was confused, because i thought of was actual code. we do not have a code that accurately deals with it. how are they classified? what was the approval process? >> i cannot speak for that.

one was in a heavier use area. if this had been proposed a couple years ago, we would be looking at it a little differently. commercial uses workers in the region were permitted -- commercial use workers were permitted. commercial uses were allowed as they are in the nearest commercial district. neighborhood commercial districts do not allow animal hospitals. >> phoi saw that. >> the nearest was south of

market. they are only a loan here this year. they decided these are similar and we would regulate it that way. >> there is part of me that things we need to clean up the code of. -- coda. i do not think it is fair to say this is like an animal hospital curator -- animal hospital. that is troubling. i have heard they do not have a problem with the concept. it sounds interesting. your business model is not my own business. my real concern is how we are applying the current.

also whether or not the code is applicable. >> other than to restate it has been determined to been within the context, the way to do with it. >> i do not know if there is a suggestion, but these facilities seem to be more popular. >> there is a formalist interpretation. that happens quite often they become more specific. >> for some reason they arrived at the no. 12.

do we know what the logic was for determining that 12 is the number? >> i can guess, but i would not want to do that. >> the number of animal bed syria and -- and beds. >> it is going back to what the code says and the interpretation, and this seems to be an outside a los that interpretation. -- outside of that interpretation. >> i think your explanation exhibited good organizational

skills, so i think you will do really well. i am familiar with some of these facilities. there is one close to my dental office. they have residential of of them. ei have not heard of too many problems. i am not saying there are not any. it seems very popular. i would move that we approve with the conditions of approval forwarded by staff and exhibition exhibit a, and i did not know if we have to include

the standards. comissioner sugaya: i had a misconception of what the use was going to be. now you clarify there is no overnight space. if we have the dogs split stocks -- up, 15 dogs to an area, and if they are all there, 60 dogs, so how does the situation worked, how many times during the day do dogs poo? i asked because according to the conditions of the health or were

of the construction comes from, you're supposed to have concrete floors and trains and the ability to wash them away. you watch them all away into a drain? how does this work? >> what usually happens is the dogs are trained to go in a particular phase, and that is because the dogs before them have gone. that is generally clean more often. by the end of today, the whole place is washed down. otherwise, it will smile appearing it quacks -- it will

smile. >> i understand they have this for that purpose. is the place they aren't trained to go separate region they are trained to go separate? >> it is within that space. within each of the spaces will be an area, and that will be cleaned more frequently commoane whole place is clean. some of them you cannot see through them. about 6 foot high were you cannot see through the chain links. >> the existing mezzanine has a concrete floor? >> it has not been built yet.

it will have a concrete floor. >> we have a dog, but i do not use a dog day care. i have been in facilities that have 50 dogs. when they are well-run, you do not hear any barking. groups of dogs when they are together do not necessarily create barking. they can be done in the manner described curator of >> -- the manner described. >> did this required neighborhood notification? there was support from the

neighborhood? >> they were concerned about cleaning up. >> cleaning up is ultimately an issue in terms of ensuring the building is built to the standards outlined. >> i may also mention there are a number of dog day cares that do not to dog walking in addition to normal care, and they have been existing for years. >> there was a motion? is there a second? >> i will second the motion. >> did it include both of these? >> it did include conditions of

approval >> those are department of public health. and >> i just have to say, i think you have answered a lot of our questions. you have to run your business, and we cannot judge whether it will make sense. this building has been vacant for 10 or 20 years. i hope you will work on ways to support the residents of the community. it would be ashamed to have the facility exists if it does not provide a benefit to the neighborhood. >> the motion is for approval with conditions guaranteed by staff.

on that motion -- k[calling votes] that motion passed unanimously. you are now on item number. -- number 11. >> good evening, commissioners. before you is a request for discretionary review of a building permit application to construct a three story horizontal and vertical addition

to an existing family building. the addition will be set back 43 feet and associated in the side yard. the subject parcel is 122.5 feet by 120 feet wide and located between 20 and street and 20 first street. the building is a two-story residence with no off street parking. the issue of the requester are impacts to light and privacy of the windows located on the north of the building. that it does not match the character and the project has not undergone adequacy historic

review and does not conform to standards. the department reviewed the project to a building that appears eligible to a potential historic district. the proposed addition is placed in a manner that will not defying architectural features of the building and is compatible with the existing building the addition, while visible from the street is subordinate to the main body of the building, does not overwhelm the existing building, allows the existing configuration to continue to read from the street and is compatible with existing historic buildings. the proposal would infiltrate the side yard in a manner that

is consistent with similar buildings on the block. the commission had an informational hearing on the resource survey yesterday. good at a hearing, the commissioners advised staff that a document would be helpful they have agreed to make appropriate augmentations. they did not take any action on the survey. the proposed project has been reviewed by the residents, which found the proposal met the guidelines. it did not present exceptional circumstances. it has been designed to minimize

impact to light and privacy and to maintain existing scale. it is designed in a manner that is consistent with the character, maintains a rear yard consistent with neighbors to the south end is appropriate to the space. we find it is consistent with the planning code, and guidelines have been adequately reviewed, and the staff recommends the commission approve the project. that concludes my presentation. >> thank you. dr requester?

>> my name is joe butler, and i represent adjacent neighbors for the proposed project. i am going to explain how the guidelines become standard. this is the book of the standards. they are executive summaries of what the guidelines actually state. the guidelines talk about specific building systems, roofs, and porches, and in so doing, they limit the types of things that can be done to historic resources in terms of recommended treatment and not recommended treatment.

when we look under rehabilitation, for alterations, i am talking about the guidelines introducing new construction on to the building site, which is incompatible in terms of design material, color, and texture. additionally, removing of historic building in the complex for removing a building future or a landscape feature, which is important in defining the character of the site, so here is the photo of the houses in question. the sponsor lives in the house to the right. those are two separate houses.

they are detached. the lots are 25 feet wide, and the buildings are 25 feet wide. there are six of them, and those are all still in tact. some have been partially filled, and we show that was done in 1889. the question is whether it is consistent with the pattern of the neighborhood. we do not believe when you include these standards -- one of the best blocks in the mission, in terms of the

integrity of the building, and one of the things the district comprises is yards. they are detached houses, meaning the yards are in the front. they are in the back, and the sides, so to say a character- defining feature is being removed or that it is ok, the guidelines do not say anything about the distance,. the department has made up the word, and they talk about things the guidelines do not they say it is going to jump up a story. people who walked none of the street with a cane would tell

you it is invisible, but the rest of us would see the scale of the windows, and they would know that was in an edition -- an addition that was made not in keeping with the original date of construction. these houses were here before the survey, so there was no surprise to the staff of the quality of the environment was not incredible. you can see these are not row houses. they are a row of houses, and they should be left at the end of the project to remain as a row of houses. the yellow highlighted things are in my brief. they talk about the the attached houses. at a hearing yesterday common one of the -- they wanted one of

the features to be listed. they should have been listed, and the review should have been done. thank you very much. >> speakers in favor? >> we met earlier. i am bonnie. i have lived in the district for over 10 years. i am extremely concerned about the elements, namely their intention to close off the space between our homes. i think joe showed you what this looks like currently. this will come up in a minute.