open side spacing and the ability to see landscaping and vegetation. the attached housing is an anomaly in san francisco. my home and my neighbor's home have remained detached for over 100 years, i unique feature to be honored and preserved. planning staff referred to bad as mentioned earlier. also, are brought this point of yesterday at the planning commission meeting. the president agreed the spacing is a character-defining feature,

which should be preserved, and it is very clear they thought this was significant. of these allow natural light and air. it will be severely diminished. i am going to show you the upper unit. that is the light pouring through. that would be completely cut off. i want you to know the upper part of our building does touch

a neighbor's home, and i am going to show you a picture of our side yard. i want you to know that even though it touches only on the top floor, there is still free flow of air and light, and there are no windows, so there is zero impact on their natural light. i respect their right to the property. we have asked them to negotiate to find compromises to no avail. thank you. >> additional speakers in favor? >> i have been a resident for 19

years. i am also full-time faculty and committed to raising a family. i am going to talk briefly about preserving the space. i have an aerial photo that shows you ferris is amid block space. -- there is a mid-block space. also, this is a map the project sponsor put together to show the different buildings. there are some buildings within the space, but they are one story and to story.

there is one on the end. the next thing i want to talk about is the size and scale of the space. here is the proposed new drawing, and you can see the scale of the project is larger and different from the current buildings. when i saw this picture, it reminded me of the picture in the guidelines. there is a large map put on an old house. they recommend a smaller structure, and the residential

design guides clearly states that even when permitted by the planning code, building expansions into the rear yard may not be an appropriate depending on the other buildings. the last thing i want to say is the proposed project proposes to eliminate the trees, and you can see them from the street as well. it is a densely packed urban area. they have been there a long time. i urge you to reconsider these plans. no one lives forever, but the modifications will remain.

thank you. >> good afternoon. i live at 646, a unit of the same house they have been talking about. i bought it for its historic features because it is a freestanding house and because it gets a beautiful life. i am eager for them to approve. the design they have proposed is not the only way to achieve their end. the proposed rectangular addition will be substantially visible from the street, and i have a couple of pictures.

here you can see, this is the property. they will be adding there at addition, and it will come out here. in addition, you can see it in this drawing, which was used to demonstrate the visibility from the street to the open lot to the north. i want to talk about the pattern of homes on our block, especially in the middle section of the block. all of the houses pictured in blue are free standing. the map shows the property is in

the middle of our row of two- story buildings. the yellow is three-story buildings. red is four-story buildings. the block is dominated by two- story buildings. while i am concerned about the impact to my own environment, i am concerned about protecting the historic nature, which they have determined is part of a significant historic district. when we first met with the project sponsors, we were quite blindsided by their proposal, and i was alarmed by the impact it would have on us and on neighboring properties. the project sponsor has made some changes to the design, but only changes required by the planning department and building code. they have not replied to our concerns -- we requested this

reluctantly. they have submitted their plans to discuss the modifications, all without success. the more we examine the development, and the more we learn about our neighborhood -- >> thank you. are there additional speakers in favor? >> hello, my name is joyce. i live in one house away from the project. one reason i purchase my home is from the rear of my unit, i see an enormous area of trees during good -- area of trees.

you see many types of trees, birds, and flowers, so the reason i bought the house is that i seek other beautiful victorian houses. this project would impact my view looking north from the outside of my home and remove some of the greenery, which can be seen when you look down on the neighborhood of backyards. i have been a tour guide in san francisco for 15 years and served on the board, and i do walking tours of mission district, showing people the beautiful architecture and murals and our great food as

well, and it is a real shame they do anything to remove these one-of-a-kind buildings, which are really unique to san francisco, especially the leafy streets, a little quiet back alley, and it is one of people's favorite places reaching my personal street. it is a unique narrow lane, which gets more bicycles than cars, and even though there are some examples of modern architecture on the corners, in the middle of the block, those maintain free standing side yard classic houses. that is all i have to say, and i recommend you vote against the current plan. >> thank you. >> my name is a meal.

-- emile. this is how i am going to be impacted. this is mine right there. you can see right there. that is exactly where the sun is going to set, right into my house. that is how the sun will come. i will no longer receive the son region sun -- the sun. that is the back, the compound,

and the parking lot. that is what i enjoy every day. i would significantly lose my son, and this one, to. the backyard. all the light will be lost there, too. the sun will come in from there. i also disagree. thank you for a much. >> are there additional speakers in favor of fund -- the r? if not, project sponsor? >> good afternoon.

my name is our neil lerner, and i am here to address the proposed project, which is concerning a historic resources. we analyze and -- as stated, it is my experience that the proposed project does satisfy the standard. the most important feature of the project can be seen on this map, which shows the original house, which is being retained. the multistory addition begins beyond that. while the building has been cited as having the wood shingles, the characteristics have been preserved. the misinformation you have been given that all buildings on the block are freestanding and have

open side yards needs to be understood. looking at this drawing here, which shows the project sponsors house, there are a number of buildings that the side yard -- buildings are separated. those side yards are not all the way through the lot, including the requester. also, in terms of the survey that is done for the neighborhood, that was done by page. now you do have this letter from the man who did the survey, establish the standards for the neighborhood, who also concurs the project does meet the standards and is appropriate and the character-defining features of the historic district are preserved with the project.

it >> thank you. >> i am the project sponsor and architect. i would like to talk first about the needs of the client and the homeowners and expanding the home. the existing condition is small bedrooms, a small kitchen. there is a small living room. there is one the firm, and there is no storage space. we are living in the upper unit of two units. what they would like to do is expand this for their increasing families for the long term, especially for the mother when she is visiting, and to be able to have appropriate living spaces. one thing i would like to address first would probably be the light issue. i have done charts to show the impact on the neighbors, and i would like to reiterate we aren't to the north region we

are located to the north. most of the light -- we are located to the north. most of the light is coming from the south. it basically amounts to maybe a couple of hours during the solstice, and it decreases to about an hour every day after that and mostly the late summer and spring. i would also like to address the privacy issues a little bit. they made some claims about window adjacency, and these have got to be approved. one thing i also would like to address would have to be the open space. you can see, these are filled in

paraded -- filled in. this property would be filled in. a lot of these lots are allowed to have the side yards. the property to the south has some of this area. i would also like to talk about the proposals that were given to us. on the top floor, it would basically end up being the usual at its base -- usual attic space. thank you for your time. >> thank you.

additional speakers in favor of the project bowman -- of the project bowman -- project? >> my name is mike. i own the property with my brother tony. i have lived in the city for seven years. i have lived in my home for five years. i am not a professional developer. i am not a house flipper. i tend to live in a house along time after it is completed. let me say i am sorry you have to hear this. i do not want to be here. i would love to have settled this before coming here. sorry for taking up your time. i think they're real issues have been addressed by ryan -- the real issues have been addressed

by ryan and the planning department. i am going to talk about my personal experience. i think we started with a reasonable project. we removed the light wells, lower the height of the project. we did a lot of things region we do see impacts on the property before we showed it to them. we have this project where you can hardly see it from the street. it keeps 47 feet of the side yard open. it makes better use of the property. it makes the building safer. it protects the history of the neighborhood. it seemed like a good proposal all are around, and we have reached out to the community. we have talked to dozens of neighbors, and all but a small handful had any objections to

the project. this looks fine. that is what we heard from almost every person we talked to. a couple of people were concerned about construction noise, and we will do our best to mitigate that. talking to our neighbors who signed a proposal opposing the project, we were stunned to learn that some of them were never shown the plans when asked not to oppose the project. when they have seen the plans and the rendering, the reaction was as i described. that is a reasonable proposal. i do not have problems with it. when we first showed our proposal to our neighbor, we have hardly showed them the before the reaction was, this is a monster. it is terrible, they said they would fight it.

we met with them three times, we exchanged numerous females. i went over to their property. [chime] president miguel: thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. i work with my brother. our house was severely under built. editions were made in a piecemeal fashion. the top flap has only one bathroom and no central heat. in order to make our house more livable, we had to make room for

eventual families. we applied for the building permit before you now. even before we approached the request is, we made several changes to reduce the impact on them. for example, we scaled back the expansion to the east of the light well, but the initial plan would have still been in compliance with the planning code in the residential design guidelines. upon presenting our plan, their reaction was one of indignation. they objected to the amount of light available in the disappearance of their view. our house sits to the north, and the project would only cast a little shadow on them in a rare occasions while they're building cast a shadow on us all the time. we completely removed the roof

penthouse which made for more complicated structural issues. the claims of the loss of light was confusing to me since states sought a variance for an illegal act that extends into the space. the request for sought my support and asked that i write a letter despite the fact that it casts a shadow and their backyard and reduces our privacy. out of respect, i gave them a letter. less than a year later, we submitted a proposal that did not require variantce. the request is to capture much more light if they removed the deck for which they sought a variance. we wanted them to be able to have some indirect warning light and hear the sounds of the neighborhood coming from the street. over the course of the last few

months, we have gone door to door to keep the neighbors to address any concerns they had. support was overwhelmingly positive. as is evidenced by the many letters of support and opposition. i respect -- i request that the commission not approve it. president miguel: additional speakers? you have a two-minute rebuttal. >> thank you, president miguel. that is wanted to say that what the owners took out for an illegal that has been there for 20 years before either of them had moved to the property. they were legalizing something. was this adequately reviewed?

under the standards for rehabilitation, distinctive materials and construction techniques, or examples of craftsmanship that characterize the property will be preserved. i think the preservation is the issue here, that this current application can't meet. i think it is an issue of ventilation as much as light. the air moves around differently. please take discretionary review that is no taller. it is truly support meant. -- support a net -- subordinate. president miguel: project sponsor, two minutes. >> i would like to go over some of the concessions we have made.

we have completed a foot production on the top floor -- footprint reduction on the top floor. we can put a transparent railing, we switched the location at the rear to allow more light, and we have also shortened the balcony. i also like to talk a little bit about the effect of the north property. there is essentially a 25 foot wide yardage used for parking right now that will be mostly affected. you can kind of see the shadow studies to the area, and they are really only going to get to the garden area. that is mostly just going to be all around the winter solstice, and probably just for a couple of weeks. i do not think the proposal

will touch light in that space. president miguel: thank you. commissioner sugaya: this is a difficult situation, because it has several aspects of its that will affect the decision. we have one preservation architect on one side of the issue, we have another preservation architect on the other side of the issue. we have a third with letters in our packets who has rendered an opinion that he feels that the addition is ok. the same gentleman and i are on to opposite sides of the fence on a different issue, just to bring further complication into this picture. in that case, i am defending an addition and he is trying to say

that the addition is not in keeping with the history of the house. we have all of that facing us here. and i think there are a couple of ways to look at this. if you take the survey that has been conducted in the south mission in which the street is a part of that, the historic preservation commission took that yesterday. we pointed out certain district characteristics including at the side yards. it certainly does exist here. and we are getting the argument as we have heard from the request for is that it is one of the more important characteristics that should be maintained.