on the variants but has expressed concern over the property size and steep slope. the owner and occupant of the property is the adjacent -- the adjacent property to the north is concerned about access to the windows at the rear of his building and the lower dwelling entry stairs leading to the adjacent public property. the project would add a maximum of 5 feet to the building's steps above the garage and would only cast a shadow on the adjacent property for a significant time during noon in the winter months. any additional building that would cast an additional shadow at this time of year. the project would not impact the eastern exposure. furthermore, the additional

building that is well articulated and set back 5 feet from the property line to impact the request for the building. the entry stairs for the lower unit would be constructed on the adjacent public property. staff has confirmed that dpw generally supports the stairs and would require a minor improvement permit for construction. sponsors also discussed stairs that would connect mars to corbett avenue. although the stairs are not part of the project, supports the idea because it would increase pedestrian safety in an area that currently has no sidewalks. it is consistent with similar public's airwaves in the neighborhood. the department has received 10 letters of support and one phone call in opposition. most of the correspondence came from neighbors within the immediate neighborhood. the department support the project because it is well-

articulated to impact adjacent properties on a level that is reasonable to expect. it is good urban design and does not constitute privatization of public property. this project would not be referred to the commission as it does not contain or create any exceptional circumstances. president olague: at this time, we will hear from the dr requestoer. >> i live at 65 mars. i have lived there about 20 years. i don't oppose the plan to build. why he is building, what he is building, it all sounds good to me.

dave is a good neighbor. however, we do disagree about some of the details. 75 mars is one of three houses side by side. each lot is small and like a trapezoid. they were built to form a three- story facade to form a plane. each is set back from the sidewalk, leaving a strip of green space. there are tall trees on the corner. i think the green entries are beautiful. other people see it as ripe for development. i like them. the value of the green strip is not theoretical to the neighbors. value is easy to measure. there are many days of personal labor. these three adjacent houses are

wall-to-wall and corner to corner. the straight line is striking. if it were not preserved on purpose, i am sure each of the houses would have been doing the same thing, edging closer and closer, crowding each other out for the sunlight, the way adjacent tenants built upward. the unbroken sunny facade has been beneficial for everybody since at least 1940. it is precisely the neighborhood character that the priority policy of the planning codes and master plan protect. the sunlight this year is also with the priority policy. i have no doubt at all that an architect could devise a design solution that would not have to take anything to add to the light that 75 mars already

enjoys. especially interesting is an overhang that will protect 75 mars from getting too much light and cast a shadow on my window. it seems to me perverse that anything being built to limit light should do it at my expense next door. i think that the only adjustment that would have to be made to the building as proposed is to move it back a little bit and remove the awning, which is only to keep the extra light out of the structure. it is so ironic to me. i did not even think of it today. it is a bright, sunny facade. i think these reasons are good enough to prevail based on what i read in the planning code master plan, which talks about access to sunlight, character,

consistency with those priority policies, that the master plan and priority plans rely on them, and i have one other comment to make. in discussions we have had, the neighborhood association's name has been tossed around quite a bit. in fact, they have not voted on this issue. we have not had a meeting. they had nothing to do with this issue by design. i personally think it might be misleading to think of a neighborhood association weighing in. a neighbor of mine could not come today because his lectern. he and other neighbors opposed the use of the public space. he and other neighbors would like more time to meet as a group. they have only had one group meeting, at which i think people did not appreciate what they were looking at in the drawings,

and issues of mass and scale, a lot of issues were raised that i did not use here. i don't think i should give up one lumen for somebody who want to limit his light. since 1940, people have successfully built houses that did not get in each other's way. the design is great and would make the block better. that is not at issue. at issue is what that design does and i have not heard a single reason at all about why there is no alternative. all i hear is, this is the design, don't worry. [tone] president olague: thank you. are other speakers in support of the dr requester? project sponsor?

>> good afternoon, commissioners. i am the architect for the proposed project at 75 marks. let me put down some visuals. the proposed project has added a unit and two parking spaces. 75 mars is there. it is a unique lot. it has frontage to the public right-of-way on three sides. the rear part of the houses at an angle to the adjacent houses. there is also a bay window there. the existing house is seen from mars street. one-story profile. the back of the house, as you can see, because of the angle,

it is not a solid wall. the bay window is there. it is the back of the building. this is the proposed design. it is broken up by a set back terrace above the garage. there is a projecting roof overhang. we have proposed to turn it into a trellis so the daylight demonstrates the effects of this with shadow studies. daylight would not be interfered with on the property. the original plan showed it as a solid rules. -- roof. the building is appropriately scaled to the street. it would still be the shortest building on mars, except for the building at 65, which is only one story. on corbett avenue, it is an

appropriate scale. there is a mix of stories. this is showing the rear facade. there is a large, multi-level deck that protrudes to the north. 65 mars and 75 mars. we have been very careful to keep the building below the height of the viewing angle across the street. we have to keep this scale appropriate. this is showing marses' street as well. as regards the issues with light and shadows, we have met with and proposed alterations to the building volume. this is out here with the original proposal we showed during the pre-application meeting at the project sponsor's

house. since then, we have pulled it back more than 3 feet at that point. he enjoys a panoramic view of the back of his house. that is the view from his living room window over the hills. this shows where the proposed corner of the project would come to. we have done shadows studies. we have done exhaustive studies. they show, effectively, the existing shadows. this is the response back. the great ones are the new shadows. the existing house itself basically cast shadows on the adjacent building at the darkest time of year. the black shadow is the existing building and the gray is what the new building cast. all other times of the year, the

new edition will not cast any substantial chateau. -- shadow. to conclude about the open space next door, it is a public right of way. far from seeking to privatize any of this, we are seeking to improve it. its current status something of a bramble. this is the end of the sidewalk. it does not go through. there is no safe pedestrian connection. we know this is in the purview of the department of public works, not the planning department. the proposal to extend up to mars street would have a safe pedestrian connection and open it up for public use and enjoyment. things you. president olague: -- thank you. president olague: thank you. are there other speakers in

support of the project sponsor? yes or no? ok. >> my name is david and i am the project sponsor. i thought it might be best, rather than me telling you about it, just to read a couple of letters. the first letter i will read as from the neighbor two doors up on the same side of the street. pardon? can you hear? "dear michael smith, i have seen the plans put forth by your neighbor and then impressed not only with the plants, but the time and trouble with john david has taken to accommodate the neighbors on the street. as a senior citizen, i like the staircase he proposes that will eventually connect the streets so that i don't have to walk in the road.

i walked to the bus stop at night after work. i also think the light and he wants to put in will put the -- make the streets safer than it is now. i think it is a classic project and support it despite the fact that i will have a slightly lesser view from the deck. -- from the deck." no other opponents of the other shown up to any of the meetings. one public meeting we did have, none of the people came. thank you. president olague: thank you. are there additional speakers in support of the project sponsor? >> good afternoon, commissioners. i have a small architectural practice i operate out of my

home, which is located down the street from the proposed project. i've lived there with my family for the past will years. i would like to voice my strong support for the project as proposed for the following reasons. first of all, the project as a dwelling unit to the city's stock, which is a good thing. secondly, the project provides additional off-street parking for two cars. thirdly, and importantly, is that, as is evident in that which was president -- presented in the proposed structures' scale, i feel very excited on an unusually challenging site. finally, i would like to speak to the potential for enhancement to public right of way, which is

currently a decrepit public spot, which would kind of add to the collection of extraordinary public right of ways that are kind of like a consolation for great places i like to go spend time and walked two. it would be great -- be a great enhancement to the city. i am confident of this project is approved, it will inspire other project sponsors and architects to do great work that will make our city and even better city. thank you. president olague: thank you. are there additional speakers in support of project sponsor? please line up. >> good afternoon.

i want to tell you that i personally approved plans on the design for the new home. as a friend of david, i have witnessed the development and the improvements of the design over the last three years. i have discussed the progress and final renderings with david. i approved the plans to open up the land next door for public use. the stairways of san francisco are a treasure for us to enjoy each day. his visions of opening up the land is very generous. it is an overgrown public space. for him to improve and agreed to maintain it for the public good is very generous. i encourage you to support this project. >> good afternoon. i am a friend of david's.

i want to keep the short and simple. in the 15 years i have known david, he has oftentimes put the concerns of others before his own. i think that in this project that is put before you, he has been willing to scale back to accommodate the concerns of the requesting dr individual, and also the in -- the idea of improving the public space. it is not private property to give back to the community. also, for the safety of the neighbors to enjoy that space as well. i support his wish to in -- improve this property. thank you. >> good afternoon. -stuart. i live in the neighborhood. i support the project.

i spent a lot of time with david talking about the project and i know the lengths to which he has gone to compromise. i wanted to support and tell you that. thank you. president olague: thank you. additional speakers? seeing none, you have two minutes for rebuttal. >> i actually agree with every single thing you have heard, except part of it. nobody has explained to me why only this design would work. nobody has explained to me why protection from the sun should use of my life. i believe the house could be built there. i believe the sun could be kept out of 75 without the protruding trellis or overhang or eave or whatever you call it.

personally, i think the design is refreshing and it looks bigger than it really is. it seems massive, but i can see it is the same scale. i don't understand why i have to fight for these priorities in the plan when i have not heard that changing the house, pulling it back, would run into a river bed, or damage a sewer, or impedes children going to school. i have not heard why a proposal was made that was bigger -- i have used this before -- like a bigger foot than the issue that was chosen -- the shoe that was chosen. we knew these were tiny houses. now i am on the defensive, saying we have the master plan and the planning code, and it seems not to matter, which stymies me.

if there were an opposing argument that it must be this size, which would be uneconomic, you could not rent the other unit, or would not have a habitable space, i don't understand why somebody else can judge that the light coming in is not too much. it happens that the wall is the only wall with windows that the room has. what seems trivial in the larger view is quite significant to the structure. president olague: thank you. project's sponsor, you have two minutes. >> yes. we have worked with the requester and have done shadow studies to demonstrate the relatively low level of impact. we have proposed changes. we have got to know responses.

frankly, we've demonstrated the effect on the adjacent property is very small. that is all within the booklet. i'm happy to share that with you. we want to make sure we did present this at 75 mars. the whole neighborhood was and bite. we also had a meeting with the neighborhood association last june above the bank of america on castro and 18th. the dr requester, no one came to that meeting. there was not a vote taken of that meeting. the general mood was positive about the project. thank you. president olague: thank you. public hearing is closed. commissioner moore: i believe it

would be extraordinary if we were to take the dr. the building has gone through documented adjustments and changes. i think it has designed itself to better fit the lots over a time frame that is a little over a year. i think it has really done the litmus test in examining the impact of shadow and to have a passing building chateau in the middle of december, which in itself is saying it comes and goes. it is not enough to modify the building. i think this site is treated very sensitively. i very much find the engagement of the open space in a meaningful way of very positive thing not only for the building itself, but for everybody

partaking in the surrounding streets. there is nothing oversized or unusual as to [inaudible] >> second. >> commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: could i have more on this encroachment? was it mentioned that there was some kind of access being provided between the two streets? i cannot find that on the plans. >> currently, this is public right of way. there is a sidewalk that terminates. there is no direct pedestrian access. the project sponsor and the architect can interject if i'm not saying this totally correct. they will have access provided to the new units through a

walkway that will partially going to the public right-of- way. it will extend that all the way up to corbett. it would provide a pedestrian linkage between the streets. that is something they would have to get to be able to do that. that would come after this process. >> if we look of the plan on a01, the property line is labeled as going of least the full building length into what is shown as landscaped area. i assume that belongs to the property owner. >> i believe so. commissioner sugaya: the city property is only a little sliver of a triangle at the corner of the two streets.

>> commissioner? i will lay out some diagrams that explain the existing conditions. this is the existing situation. that is the footprint of 75 marks. adjacent to it, there is an existing concrete stair. this is a one to one slope. 30 years ago or so, previous owner built a little back out here. otherwise, this is all public space to this point. >> where is your property line? >> property line is right here. this is the survey showing exists within the space. this is all public space.

from here all the way out. this is a one-to-one slope. this is a little chain-link fence. concrete steps were built as an access to the basement. that is all public property. anyone from the public can sit on the deck and enjoy it if they wanted to. here is the proposed situation where we're proposing stairway access. it is coming up a few steps from the sidewalk. it is not encroaching on the sidewalk. the retaining wall is where the first riser would be. this there would come up to the lower one to give that new dwelling unit and attractive entry. the proposed idea, and we've

discussed this with the neighbors across the street, would be to use it as a launching pad for the first phase of a landscape that would continue all the way up to mars street. corbett avenue has buses roaring down it at pretty high speeds. there is no crosswalk. being that the subject property is effectively responsible for taking care of that space, just as everyone else is responsible for taking care of the sidewalk, in its current condition, it is a place for people to throw trash, some people sleep there, and cars get broken into. there is no public access through that. we would be making a significant improvement to it. commissioner sugaya: i think

that on the plot plan that is in our plans on your sheet, there are property lines drawn that extend further than what you're indicating. >> there are dotted lines showing -- let me go get -- >> it does not matter. we know where the property and. do whatever you have to do. i was more interested because -- never mind. your explanation was great. the stairway idea is great. i don't know of that as part of our purview. president olague: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i think this is a good project and particularly well done with contemporary design.