dwelling and the construction of a new three-story garage located at 309, 311 eureka street. i'll put an imagine up of the existing structure. the lot is zoned rh 2 and it sloped down from the north to the sourt. the existing structure showed on the screen, whenever it comes up, is a -- provides two -- two bedroom units on two stories with a -- with approximately 2,425 square feet of living space. as proposed the new building will provide two dwelling units. so this is the proposal of the demolition of a two-dwelling unit. and the construction of a new two-dwelling unit. there will be one three bedroom

unit with a total of 3,045 of living space. the new structure will provide two off-street parking spaces from the single garage. there is a mandatory discretionary review. an addition three requests of d.r.'s were filed. one of those requests were withdrawn after revisions to the proposals were made. there remains two publicly filed d.r.'s. one by the northern to the south and one by 20th street which their rear yard abuts the rear yard of this prompt. the to pop gi is such that the d.er is to the south than that of the subject building. and the subject building is higher than on the slope than

the second d.r. requester who's property is on 20th street. i have images that can show all of that. the department's recommendations will be to improve construction as opposed. the d.r. requesters are here to speak as well. the shared concerns include impacts to light, air, and privacy primarily due to the rear of the new structure. the d.r. requester to the south the proposed demolition of a building may be historically significant and impacts to the large cypress tree to the north of the property. the proposed project has been reviewed four times by the residential design team.

the proposed project has been proposed four times which is determined after the publicly filed d.r., that the existing property is mixed and that the proposed new building is consistent with the residential design buildings. it looks like we're having trouble with the image on the screen. it's ok. i can summarize if you have questions. i wanted to draw your attention to specifically are the fact that the proposed structure includes setbacks to the front and rear for the upper stories, set back 15 feet from the front building and 12 feet from the rear building and that's specifically to address impact to the neighbors. if you look at the project in planned view, there are, i believe it's a three-foot side

step back along the property line that exactly matches that to one of the neighbors, one of the d.r. filers. in regards to the question of whether or not the existing structure is a potential historic resource, the project has been issued a categorical exemption. the department determined that the existing structure is not eligible for the california registered. it's not historically significant structure pursuant to sequa. as far as public comment, as of this morning, staff new of three property owners in opposition to the proposed project in addition to the d.r. the owner of eureka which is south of the property. 4431 20th street which is north of the subject property as well as the documents of 261 chenry street. staff has received two letters of support for the demolition

and i have those additional letters to distribute to you. i believe that both the project sponsor and the d.r. requesters may have additional letter that came and factored in. the department recommends that you approve the demolition and the new construction. it will provide two family sized dwelling units. although no new dwelling units are added to the sights, the additional units will be upgraded and provide greater access to air. the idea is that they're more suitable for families. no tenants will be display placed. and that concludes my presentation. but i'm certainly available for quo. i know that the project sponsor and the d.r. requesters have presentations as well. >> thank you. we ve two d.r. requesters. so we'll hear from each of them at this time.

[inaudible] >> do we have time to put it?

>> we're going to ask for a five-minute recess so they can set this up. president olague: the planning commission is back in session. commissioners, i think we have just gone through the staff presentation for item 18 for 309-311 you reekaver street. >> good evening. i'm george haaser, i'm one of

the applicants. i life at 309 eureka street. this site plans concerns the principal concerns of the neighbors and that is the height of the project, particularly in the center and the way it presents from the mid-block open space, it has impact to the properties to their gardens and south walls and impacts my property which is just south and the way it overshadows our north courtyard which is a source of light for principal rooms in our building. this is a street view looking down from the south to the north. you see the subject property on the end there. and the lot slopes to the rear of the properties and this property is the last east-west lot on the block and it has this unique opportunity where it has

this north naysing wall that faces the gardens on 20th street and it presents light and views from that property. you can see stepping down of the buildings on the mid-block and also the characteristic roof forms, gable roofs, and lower slide to the left, it is a view across the subject property towards the 20th street properties and see the same characteristics sloping down from west to east. on the right, my property is in the middle. you can see the characteristics. this is the view from the deck of the house south of mine. in 2005, my wife and i undertook a renovation of my property, which is just over the

guardrail. and we could have gone up a story. we had plenty of envelope there. and we decided to not build that addition in deference to jaime -- james' needs for lights. we are asking them to take advantage of the slope and build at a lower level. this is the transfer section through the block. subject property is in the center and you see the garden and the property to the left overshadowed by the subject property. my property is to the right and then james' property is to the right of that. and by the time they reach the back of their property, that -- there is -- we asking them to remove the top story and conform to the slope line of the block. you can see the north wall of their property looking up from

the fords' property. you can see how how that property is. that wall in the left photograph is 19 feet above. they are going up to 36 feet, almost two stories there. and this shows the profile of the properties. the proposal is the shaded area and the line at the bottom represents the rear wall of the 20th street property and can see their property is taller than mine in fact rather than stepping down. and this is a proposal that we put forth and this shows the relationship between their north wall and the adjacent grade. plenty of room for light and air and this lower level is not even part of their plan. this is suggesting we are suggesting they could take advantage of to get equivalent space. we put forward a proposal in

november of last year demonstrating using this envelope, we demonstrated they could achieve their program inside the envelope that we proposed. they have two-story units, two of them, one above the other, three bedrooms, 2 1/2 baths, access to the garage, access to the rear yard. it all fits in and produced a gross building area of 4,900 square feet. more than what is represented in the planers' brief. this compares the two proposals. ours is on the lower right and theirs is on the upper left. you can see the differences. these are studies that we produced along the way. on the left-hand corner, that's the existing building. next to it is my house and above

that is james' house. in the right is a proposal they put forth in 2005, concurrent with my designing my property, my additions and that proposal at that time was three stories, 28 feet tall and came back about 68 feet on the lot and we encouraged them to work with us at the time and they refused any joint interaction. president olague: we will here from the second requester. >> i thought we had five minutes. that was five? president olague: yeah. that was five. we hear from the second requester at this time. >> my husband and i live on 20th street. the red house is our house and this is the -- you can see this is the only source of natural

light into our home. on the bottom floor, those are the windows right into our kitchen. and upstairs is where we get the natural light into our bedroom and bathroom. while i understand the project at 309 eureka looks appropriate from the street the impact this proposed project has along the 20th street along with the next door neighbor that has already spoken. here's a picture of the back of our house and the proposed project will serve to cut off all access of all natural light to living space we have in our home. here is a are some pictures taken from our back yard of the existing structure and you can see how even at its current height of 19 feet at the top of the property line wall it towers over our home it is because we are joan slope from that house

and it partially obstructs sunlight into our property, the house as well as our garden. the proposed project takes the existing structure another two floors above it and pushes their floors even further back into the rear yard. we bought our house nine years ago and the changes proposed will significantly impact both our lifestyle as well as the value of our home. we want them to be able to improve their home and do it in a style that is reminiscent of the designs of the rest of the neighborhood and in a way that does not greatly impact our lives and the lives of the other homeowners on 20th street. here's some pictures of some other homes in the area. you can see the homes are quaint, victorian style, with gable roofs and allow the light.

it is more of a large mass with decks coming out at the higher levels. so we have sat down a number of times before finally submitting our d.r. to the board and feel no real concessions were made to address our desire to have the house be constructed in a way that is respectful of our home and the air and light of our neighborhood. they agreed to shave off and agreed some minor modifications but nothing was done to take more advantage of an excavation or significantly change the height of the structure in a way that addressed our needs and concerns. we would like to ask them to remove the top fourth floor they are talking about and not push the third floor as far back into the back yard. we support an excavation of their lot to allow natural light available to them and we support the neighbor's plan that shows that this is possible.

thank you so much for your time and consideration today. president olague: may i use the rest of her time? president olague: no, it doesn't work that way. we will hear from supporters of the d.r. requesters and jane seigel and others. [inaudible conversation] >> good evening. i am present today to relay my thoughts about 309-311 eureka project. i own a house and the two properties or these two properties to the south, 309 is two properties to the south of me and i'm here to support an

alternative or alternate design for 309 that is being proposed by some of the neighbors. a few years ago, huta and george remodeled their house at 313. they could have obtained more space by going up vertical but that would have greatly impacted my light. and instead what they did was they proposed to side yard addition that was shaded by trees and that were very important to me and they were pretty careful to preserve and constructed a basement that was entirely below the lowest level of my house and this left the upward levels of the house with no impact. i really seriously appreciated their consideration. the neighbor's design is based on a similar strategy.

instead of exceeding the height of 313 eureka, it would step down, thereby preserving some of the north light. the design results in more floor area by creating a lower level that would match the grade of the rear yards on the ajoining properties to the north and would allow you to walk out at grade. the lower height being proposed for 309-311 eureka, the neighbor's design would reduce the amount of shadows on the people's houses on 20th street, which is the couple who spoke before me. the neighbor's design is more in keeping with the scale and texture of the buildings on our block. it is a residential block, particularly as they are per seffed from the mid-block open space. the owner's design would set an

inappropriate precedence in our neighborhood and i'm concerned about that. can you see that? president olague: thank you. if you start talking, it will come up. >> i'm a writer and design editor that has written about buildings for 20 years in the

bay area. i know this building quite well that george lives in and i understand the kind of light and air he is referring to. the most remarkable about the 1890's cannotages that define the quality of this lot, the most modern interventions haven't disturbed their traditional look and one reason is that the existing buildings have been preserved and no four-story flats have disturbed that. 309 is the last east-west oriented lot left unchanged and as you know, the height of this building will cause a very large shadow on a garden and will destroy the light in the rooms there that i have been in. change is inevitable. but what is being proposed does not protect the neighborhood

character and the properties to be so fruitful. take george's house at 313 eureka. instead of adding a fourth floor renovation, took advantage of the downsloping lot and that is exactly what this building that is being proposed ought to do. the proposed 30 eureka design rises to four stories and fails to take advantage of the downward slope. instead of a generic solution which is probably nice in other areas, in this particular case with these rather damaging for the neighborhoods. it should dovetail better into its lot. let's call the neighbor's design, which is what george has proposed, would still give them two flats with three bedrooms, 2 1/2 baths, kitchen, living room and parking. there are these advantages. the fourth garden on the north

side of 309 eureka will have a smaller shadow. george will have windows that will -- still have light and air, otherwise they will be completely blocked. the neighbor's design allows for a bigger deck and more access and space to the gardens. i know them and their architect. they have livend there at 309 for 40 years and any changes are likely to be used for at least that long. it is imperative that it be designed correctly. i support the neighbor's design. thank you very much. president olague: thank you. >> i live next to the project site at 313 as long as george

and daughter. in 2005, we made eureka street our home. we thought about expanding our upper unit which would require another floor. it would have hugely impacted our other neighbor's property. she depends on her north -- where she depends on it for light. meanwhile, our neighbor to the north provided us with a design for their project which at that point in time in 2005 had three stories. it was 28 feet tall and 68 feet from the eureka street property line. therefore, we decided there is no need to expanding upstairs and be no longer need to worry about impacting our neighbor to the south and we decided to go down. we created a lower level by ex cavitying which is wonderful and has a lot of light. after our building was finished

and we finally had moved in, they presented a new design at a neighborhood meeting in december of 2008, which was no longer anything of what they had provided to us before before we started construction. their building was now 40 feet tall instead of 28 and 78 feet from the eureka street property line. since then, we have tried to work with them to achieve a design that was lower and less massive. we would like the commission to eliminate a story from their design, the top story and to align the rear wall of their top story with the rear wall of the top story about 62 feet from the eureka street property line. and we ask for more casing, the design they presented to us in 2005 in which we waste based our decision not to go up and to go

down. thank you very much. president olague: robert, kylea. >> i live at 317, which is the unit that is south of the proposed 309 work. my wife and i, i live with my wife and daughter and baut the place in 2004. the realtor said it was the most dill appi dated building. the precedent that this will set, when we did a lot of work on our house, we kept the house building as it was when we purchased it. it was very important for us to keep something that wases thetic

with the neighborhood and it was very important to try and keep something to what they would have expected. from our understanding of the proposal we can see how it doesn't follow the building line following down the slope. certainly visible from inside our property line even though we are three doors uphill from it. it is still visible from our property. we have seen the neighbor's proposal and it certainly seems consistent with the nature of the neighborhood arrangement. so, i would like to conclude that. we feel there are more options that are more fitting.

thank you. >> i'm here to read a letter on behalf of a resident. i'm back and forth between new york and california so i was unable to attend today's hearing, but i wanted you to know my thoughts about the proposal for a new building at 309 eureka. i live on 20th street just 309. our rear yards ajoin. i have lived in my property for many years and i tend to return there. i'm upset about the designs and i request that you reduce the height and overall size. the height of the existing of the height of the existing of 309 is 20 feet above eureka