process dealt with preapplication meetings for projects but also pre-d.r. meetings to acquaint d.r. requesters with what came under our jurisdiction and why it might be a building inspection issue. to reiterate what a lot of the commissioners have said, the project has extensions that are consistent with the adjacent structures, there's nothing unusual or extraordinary about the size of the additions. in terms of any damage to adjacent structures, this is an issue that would be taken up by department of building inspection and they have to make sure that codes are followed as far as foundations and depth and that's not our jurisdiction. we approve it, and then -- or disapprove it and then they have to go on to d.b.i. as far as attached structures, i think probably upwards of 3/4 of san francisco has attached homes

in general terms and the only place where this wouldn't be appropriate, it appears that much of silver avenue is all attached homes from what i can tell from the maps. there are areas zoned rh-1 detached which means all the homes has to be aattached to a certain point and it's not appropriate for one house to be attached to the zoning line of the neighboring house. this is an entirely different case than it is here. president olague: commissioner moore. commissioner moore: the only thing i would say, in the bilingual situation, the approval process can be overwhelming and what are we doing to ease that a little bit. is there bilingual assistance in the first meeting process so

that indeed the questions asked and the commission's decision is not so difficult for somebody. >> commission kelly ander. we have translation services available in the department. we've worked to improve those recently. the d.r. request sponsors that if they need language assistance, we would be happy to offer it. president olague: are the forms available in other licenses? >> we don't currently. but we have increased our capacity to translate and get to people quickly. president olague: it would be good to know how many requests we get to translation services.

>> i know we track the number of requests we get and the type of requests for what language but i'm not sure if we track exactly what they asked. i can look into that. >> commissioner, there is a motion and second to not take d.r. and approve as proposed. >> commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: aye. [motion passes passed unanimous. item 15 was withdrawn and that puts us on number 16, for 518 pennsylvania avenue, request for discretionary review. >> kelly ander, department

staff, again, in lieu of julian benalis who is out this week, i will present this case as an abbreviated did. d.r. case. this proposal is to add a two-story addition to an existing single family home. the proposed addition will add 15 feast depth in the rear to the first and second floors. the first floor of the addition will be set back five feet from the southern property line and the second and third floors will be set back five feet from both side property lines. additionally, the new third floor will be set back 15 feet from the front building wall of the existing home to preserve the two-story character of the west side of pennsylvania avenue in this block. it is important to note that the uniqueness of this property and the slope at the rear of the site which you can see in some of the material in your packet.

i will also let you know that the project sponsor has provided some additional renderings which they will distribute to you when they start their presentation by request of commissioner moore who asked for some additional drawings. it is a little difficult to understand the nature of the rear yard area of this part of the block. i would like to mention that this project went through the residential design team review several times, twice prior to the d.r. being filed. the residential design team did take note of the uniqueness of the site and ask for the sculpting that i just described in the addition at the rear and subsequent to the d.r. being filed and taking a closer look based on the d.r. filer's concerns, there was an additional setback required or asked for and responded to that we are 10 feet, the building being pulled in by 10 feet at

the rear on the top floor. i would also like to mention that since the the packets went out, we have received additional public comment on the proposed project. two neighbors have given us communication in favor of the project and three against and i have those emails if you'd like to see them. that concludes my presentation and i'm available for questions. president olague: thank you. d.r. requester? >> i filed a request for a discretionary -- >> excuse me, if you could pull the microphone down a little bit. >> good afternoon. i filed for a descreckedsary review -- discretionary review based on the proposals of my neighbors to build. they are to the south of me. we are on an incline and the proposal that they're building would shade my home.

currently, the house is 787 square feet. their proposal, after twice going through the design review, is still proposed at 2151 square feet. we are a row of houses that were built right after world war ii, all identical in a row. these homes have been owned by the same families since the 1950's and i understand their desire to build and i'm not against their desire to build, it's just the size they want to build. the hillside behind the house is steepest at the top of the hill and tapers off as it goes down the hill. i am the third house on the block and the hillside is very steep behind me and the level part of my yard that is usable is only 24.5 feet and their proposal is for a 15-foot addition plus a three-foot

stairwell in the back, essentially 18 out of my 24 square feet. it's going to be three stories and later they're contemplating putting solar panels above the third floor which would totally dwarf my house and leave me in -- without sun light and no natural daylight into my home. i'm not proceeds -- opposed to their construction. i would like to see it scaled down. they have offered setbacks in front and the rear but there are plans for those setbacks to be converted to decks. yes, it allows some sunlight but you're talking four stories and there's an improvement they're citing at the corner of the corner house . the corner houses are unique that in the southern exposure and the sun shines on them, they're at the corner and they

don't shade any homes and that house at the corner is currently four stories. that's only 25 feet away from me so if i have four stories here and he's building right next to me, almost the same height, i'm in a canyon because of the hillside in the back. and the way it's situated, it's like a sound barrier that they put on the highways and all the sound stays in and reverberates in that canyon and my concern is that it's so far back, their proposing, let's see, 15 feet and three-foot stairwell. at the depth of my yard, it covers 73.4% of my backyard space. i currently have fruit trees and other plants back there and it would be perpetually in the shade. i'm not opposed to them building, but i'm asking that they scale it back some. they're going from 787 to 2100 and that's after two different

reviews and the review board asking them to make it smaller. now, they haven't quite determined the total height yet because they're going to adjust for solar panels possibly. they have internal staircases that will lead them to the yard level and i was questioning whether or not a rear staircase would be required. that, in itself, would take back three feet, and let's see. they were using as comprables, as justification for their building, across the street from us -- a history on this area, dog patch, it used to be an undesirable area, world war ii, nobody really wanted to live there because all the slaughter

houses you would smell but now it's fashionable and upscale and i understand the desire to build. they're specifying that it's because they need for their family but they now live in a 3100 square feet above st. francis woods with six bedrooms so i don't see the need to accommodate their family in this 700-square-foot house they want to expand. they have their reasons, i have mine. i'm trying to preserve the sunlight that i have now and to be able to enjoy my backyard. i have five neighbors in opposition to this. i don't know how many have sent in. [bell] president olague: are there speakers in support of the d.r. requester, in support of the person who just spoke, the d.r. requester?

>> hello, my name is jane homadaga, i've been a friend of marlin fong for 40 years. her mother owned that house and i was a visitor then and she used to grow a lot of things in her backyard, the plants and she used to hang clothes out there and there was a lot of sunlight and now ms. fong has her home in another area but she had four kids. she's been supporting them and they've been thinking about downsizing and moving back to this building and if they do that, a lot of the things that were touches from her own life will be gone. and also, the family that's moving in has this 50-foot wall, retaining wall, in the back of the house where the hill comes

down and right now we don't even know how that's going to impact when it rains or if it's going to flood because they have also encroached upon that family about three feet into her land. so we're wondering if this is all necessary and she's not against them building but she would like to have it -- president olague: thank you. are there additional speakers in support of the did. d.r. requester? seeing none, project sponsor?

>> my name is gwenn bertlona and i'm the designer and project sponsor. when i first met with the laurent es, they wanted to move back to their parents home with their son. they're facing some serious medical issues and they want to be together as a family. the existing house was 787 square feet but it also had a nonconforming face on the first floor with a half bathroom that was barely functional, certainly not to code. when they came to me, they wanted to convert this nonliving space into permitted space with a new bathroom as well as

expanding the second floor and adding a master bedroom, master bath for themselves and then a separate bedroom and bathroom for their son. now, when we started this project, we were working with the planning staff and the residential design team and i'd just like to take a second and thank corey teague for all his work in helping us through this process and we have -- we have received valuable input from the r.d.t. and have gone through several rounds of revisions, each time meeting the request of the r.d.t. and changing the design to meet the changes that they ask for. there were two main issues that they wanted to see changed on the design. the first one was because of light and air and shade to their neighbor's backyard, we right away, we made accommodations to

the design for this and changed the design, added the side setbacks and rear setback with the specific purpose of eliminating issues to the neighbors. the second issue was they wanted -- the design team wanted to make sure we weren't creating a second unit on the first floor. we've made several rounds of revisions to that to make sure we were going for the design -- going to the design guidelines. and the only other issue that came up was the notion of reduced property value to the neighbors. the neighbor, the d.r. requester put together a letter from her realtor saying that the value of her property would be decreased. my clients went to this realtor and talked to her and she since issued what amounts to be a retraction letter and has backed away from her original assessment of the property value. so all through this process, all

of our changes have been made with specific purpose of eliminating issue to the neighbors. right now, the design that we have as is exceeds the design guidelines for meeting the requirements of air and light to the surrounding neighbors and if you talk to just about any realtor, they'll say that if you're enhancing the value of your property, you are just adding, enhancing the property value of the surrounding neighborhood. so we would respectfully request that you consider following the r.d.t.'s guidelines and leaving the plan as is in your packet. i want to also say that we did make a further accommodation after the d.r. request to pull in the third floor by an additional 10 feet and we did turn that space into a deck. it is not another level up, so

it is within the third floor and we had talked to mr. teague about that and he said the one thing he really wanted to make sure, that we weren't going to put any wall around that for the railing. the railing would be an open railing to make sure we mitigate any issues in regards to shade and light. thank you so much for your time. i hope you consider this project. president olague: we have one speaker card, ernest laurente. >> that's right. president olague and members of the san francisco planning commission, good afternoon. i am ernest laurente and owner of the project at 518 pennsylvania avenue. my wife and i have prepared and submitted for your review our formal response to the d.r. we have tried to make the response as thorough and complete as possible. the following is other information for your consideration. in order to understand our project, i want to provide you

with information regarding my family. my parents moved into the subject property in 1951 and the house has been our family home ever since. my dad, after serving honorably in the navy during world war ii in the pacific was discharged from a medical hospital in texas and made his way to san francisco and set roots here. he worked at the san francisco naval shipyard and worked his way up to the position of master electrician when he retired and spent retirement years with my mom at the family home. my mom was a home maker who raised three children and worked as a beautician at a local beauty shop. my parents continued to live at the home until three years ago they started to have medical problems associated with their age. they are in their mid and late 80's. they need more home and space. the family home was not big enough to accommodate a wheelchair and walker so they left the home with us. they found a living community in

seattle next door to my brother and sister. they have a spacious space inside of a mobile home so they can move about with ease with their wheels and walkers. they tell us, though, they would not have moved out of their house if it were more spacious. it's all of 787 square feet. the reason for the expansion is as follows, my wife, son and i plan to move to the house after it is built to simplify our lives. my wife has a medical condition which she prefers not to disclose but it is the reason why our son relocated from sacramento and why i retired early from my job with the city and county of san francisco. my wife and i anticipate that when we live at the family home, we will also have similar problems my parents experienced later in years because of the size of the house if we do not improve it. our son, matthew, will need space in the long term. although my parents are in washington state, they have indicated that when one dies,

the surviving parent may want to return to the family home to live out his or her remaining years. therefore, the expansion of the house is directly tied to our family's desire to continue living in the family's home. we are not trying to benefit from selling it or renting it out after the project is complete. it has been the family home for the last 60 years and hopefully longer, for two and possibly three generations of laurente. the project is reasonable. we took the extra steps to comply with the requirements and recommendations. thank you very much. president olague: thank you. are there any additional speakers for the project sponsor? seeing none, d.r. requester, you have two minutes. >> i'm putting a picture of the

backyards of the homes. it's kind of hard when you're looking at it abstractly, but if you notice, there's still clothes lines back there. it's an old, quaint neighborhood and my family has also lived there since 1950. my mother planted fruit trees there from seed when we first moved there and i would like to see the home preserved and my husband and i had planned at some point to down-size and move back. this is a photo of mr. laurente's rear yard and his proposal for 15 feet out. [inaudible] leading from here to the picket fence the amount of space left for his neighbor on this down slope before -- to the rear. here's a picture of how the rear. [inaudible] >> excuse me, ma'am -- >> this is the hillside behind

the homes. 15 feet would put it at almost -- let's see, i have my measurements. well, this was his neighbor's yard to the south and they were concerned that because his house is higher, that when they put the deck and addition, they look right into their mother's kitchen. now, i've had my backyard measured. this is a picture of my yard and to where my retaining wall is in the back here right where his foot is where the 15 feet actually ends so basically i will have this much room left of a backyard that's unencumbered by a bell that stretches the entire length of my yard and four feet and three feet and solar panels up or possibly solar panels so three feet of a solid wall with the setback and two solid feet and a setback and i would have this much space to my retaining wall and if the

stairwell was included, that would be up north three feet, leaving me essentially an arm's width of light. [bell] thank you. >> ernest laurente, property owner. i will respectfully disagree with my former neighbor who i grew up with, as well. there is over 11 feet of space that she will have in her backyard. we have submitted to you other photos that you have. the photo that she showed you, our extension goes to the beginning of that red wood railing on the southern part, not to the end of it. it's not 2.4 feet. she'll have over 11 feet of space so i think that is a factorral discrepancy that should be noted. you can look at the pictures and you can see she has over 11 feet of usable unencumbered stase even with what -- space even with what has been proposed.

as far as the solar panels, that has not been fully decided yet but if they do have it, they will be flush flat against the southern end of the third floor roof. it would not impact her backyard. the backyard that she talks about, she hasn't lived there in over 30 years. it was at one time -- i will agree, it was a beautiful backyard. it had a coy pond put in by a tenant but it has gone into neglect, it has overgrown. you have overhead shots about how thick based on the trees and other bush that has overgrown that other area. the coy pond which has no coy has been a mosquito problem, as well, and there are emails regarding a neighbor calling the health department regarding the mosquito issue. so, yes, it was, at one time, a garden that was nice but now it is a changed situation. i think that given the situation, given the fact that we have taken the extra steps to

make this within the guidelines, within the recommendations of design review, that we are in conformity with that row of 10 houses. it's not eight, it's 10 houses and the first house, 500 pennsylvania, is the house that has been improved. we're not going to the extent of that house. we have been very modest. we have followed the recommendations and i thank you. [bell] president olague: thank you. thank you. public hearing is closed. commissioners? commissioner moore? commissioner moore: i am confused, if staff could clarify for me. does the d.r. requester currently live in the property for which the person is requesting the d.r.? >> if you don't mind, i would like to defer the question to the requester. commissioner moore: may i ask the d.r. requester to identify whether or not you are currently living in the property?

>> tenant occupied. my tenants have moved. my husband and i plan to downside. my husband is terminally ill, cannot navigate the stairs in our current home. we will be moving into the house, we will be moving into the house and the depiction that they gave you. commissioner moore: i only wanted to ask a question, yes or no. at the moment you are making the d.r. request, you are not living in the property. >> we will be moving in. commissioner moore: i just want to clarify because somehow a she said, he said, i hear a disconnect in communication and it's really difficult. i also have and i have voiced that to mr. teague, the staff contact on this project, the depiction of the package was extremely weak and incomplete to the way we normally look at these things. some of the issues expressed by the d.r. requester are things

which we unfortunately don't have rules or guidance to light and air is not an issue. the potential addition of solar panels in the future does not at this moment concern us, either. it's either part of the application or it's not. i see a number of disconducts here and i'm curious to hear everybody else chime in before i come up with the conclusion of what i want to do here. president olague: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i have to go with the staff report a little bit. the residential design team apparently has offered some changes to be made to protect light and air and thereby, we had rear and side setbacks so i'm fairly confident given the fact that this actually was a case that would not have been referred to us under the new guidelines from what i understand. the other thing they did take pains do was to make sure there

was no second unit and they redesigned it so there would be no individual access to the lower quarters, thereby, and i'm sure there will be a notice of special restrictions on it. it may not be necessary to do it. the third issue that was raised was the letter from the realtor which, again, is fairly subjective as to whether property values would go up or go down. it's hard to say. oftentimes additions are opposed by the fact that they do increase property values in the area so i think a case could be made that it might increase the value rather than decrease it so i'm fairly comfortable with this. see what the other commissioners have to say. president olague: commissioner moore? commissioner moore: i'm a little bit uncomfortable because the story i hear from the applicant is somewhat not fully expressed in the design of the building for me.