to the east side of the roof. they do not need to add any improvements. in summary, we have three requests we would like to have. we have solutions for those three areas that we are concerned about. we are in a neighborhood which recommends that neighbors cooperate. we think this is something that would be helpful for the neighbors. thank you. >> thank you. we would like to hear from the permit holders. >> i am kelly condom. -- condon.

i am the designer of this project. the topics on the appeal or that we were blocking both sides. the neighbor has a rear yard. he is on a corner lot. he enjoys more exposure to light and air than most people in san francisco do by virtue of that fact. the neighbor on the other side has the identical light well. he told us his facing windows are in a bathroom and a closet. that is the way all of these lots are laid out. our building is. there is a room with a sink and a shower, and the other room is a closet. we did meet with them, and each time they asked for another thing. we think you are going to build a deck on the back of your roof, and these stairs we had never even heard of. we had no intent to build

something we have not applied for permits for. we have stairs coming down out of the penthouse because it is 18 inches up in the air to maintain drainage on the roof. we are never going to go out there unless something is wrong with the roof. that is why we have not made changes. we did not feel these were valid concerns. commissioner fung: are you finished? >> yes. also note that if you look at the photos -- should i put this here? this is the neighbor that just spoke. this right here is the end of his house. he does not have a light well. that is the back of his house.

also note the existing her putt on both our neighbors are 30 inches tall. -- the existing parapet on both our neighbors are 30 inches tall. this is the view from our roof, which will not be building an illegal back on. that is not a light well. that is his front yard. commissioner hillis: you have a light well? >> we have a light well, but they do not. commissioner hillis: is it on the property where his building is? or is it on open space? >> it is right here. commissioner hillis: what is on the other side of your light well? >> his building. the back of his building lined up right in the center of the light well. it has a roof that slopes down. by the time you get to our

second level, he has fully enclosed our light well. commissioner hillis: so his issue with the rail on the back blocking his sunlight -- >> which would follow our parapet. the reason the low were 30 inches are solid -- he wanted us to move a foot in. we would still have to fire grade the railing. then he wanted it to have glass 5 feet in, which is in the way of the door. in the floor plan, you will notice we have been asked by -- >> face it the way you would look at it. >> we had a meeting with the department of building inspection before applying to find a way to be able to keep the existing spiral staircase as our means of egress.

the concern they had was will be you -- will be lower unit have access to the roof? we need it to only have access to the upper unit. so we have put a metal gate around the top of the stairs. if i move the railing in, we would not be able to get to and from the deck. president garcia: would you go back to photograph two? show me where someone would be standing to take pictures in photograph three. >> this is better to show you on the floor plan. it is taken from the front of a -- in front of the building with a wide angle lens. photograph three is taken from the back of the building. i am standing right at the edge

to get a picture of the back, as far as i could without falling. commissioner fung: and the height of the deck of the neighbor, the appellant -- >> their deck is over the top of the garage. it is on the second level of their plot. commissioner fung: 1 full floor below the top of your roof? >> it is two story is below our roof. -- stories below our roof. >> any other questions, commissioners? thank you. mr. sanchez? scott sanchez: i do not have much to add. the project is principally permitted and compliant.

non-neighborhood notification is required. the appellant property is located to the south. given the location of the south, they would not feature any direct sunlight into that like well. -- light well. the deck is set back from the property line and matches with the light well. when they step back a few feet from the railing, he will not have a direct line into the adjacent property. the appellant has created concerns about privacy, about the potential impact of the grille. i did not even know if there is a requirement to show the gril ol on there. if it were someone to bring a charcoal grill onto the roof, i do not know that would need to be shown on any plan. these are items for the board to consider in your decision making tonight. i am available for any

questions. thank you. >> thank you. mr. duffy? >> i do not have much to add either. the real hyper code would be 42 inches high. -- the rail height per code would be 42 inches high. i do not see a problem with the gas grill. i think it is far enough from the property line to make code. i am available for any questions. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? president garcia: what you think about it?

>> i am tina bartlett hinckley -- president garcia: how many people intend to offer public comment? three minutes. >> i am tina bartlett hinckley, and i live at 2775 hilbert street. hopefully you received a letter from me. you will see that the lot is on baker street. i am on filbert street. it isn't unusual cottage at the rear of the law. when this building was offered for sale, they did tout the opportunities of a roof deck. the plan was that the upper unit would get the roof deck and the lower unit would get the backyard. i did go and see the property, and when i went up there i was horrified that i could look out of the back -- can you see this?

you can look from my bed, from those windows, directly into my bedroom. here is another picture, right from my bed. my concern is that with the plan where they are asking to have two doors in that penthouse -- the existing penthouse is basically a stair that comes up. once it is a condominium, what they will do is put a roof deck in the back. the current owners may say they are not going to do it. but i have a picture of a roof deck that was put on illegally across the street. the staircase goes down to both units. one person gets one side. the other person gets the east side. they have the no. views as well. i do believe in live and let live.

in my neighborhood, when i bought my house, it was a 2000 square foot house. everyone has said we need open space. next door, to the east side, the planning commission granted a variance so that this building was extended. it comes right up against the house. right across the street, they were given permission to go upper. i am fumbling for papers. my view directly across the street has been blocked. basically, the value of my house is my garden. i would like to be able to keep my windows open so i can look out into the garden. i have privacy so people will not look directly into my bedroom from a roof deck. i do not see why they need two doors going out to the roof. if it is oriented so the deck is

to the west, one door should suffice. i do not think you need them much access for roof maintenance. nobody else has it. >> thank you. other public comment? seeing none, we will start with a bottle. -- -- rebuttal. appelant, you have three minutes. >> ok if we split it? president garcia: anything you want to do. >> i am the south-facing neighbor. i understand the confusion, listening to the description. people are coming out -- the house next to theirs is the same. we actually have bedrooms upstairs. there is a closet, a bathroom, a whole suite.

the privacy is important to us. we put in shutters of the week blocked off people looking below, in the light well from their kitchen, but i cannot stop people from above looking in, unless things are moved back. i think that was already mentioned. were the people on the deck just a couple of feet back further, that would allow privacy in my area, which is all i am asking. i thought it was a very modest thing. i do not think losing eight or 12 feet of a 500 foot deck will have much impact on the neighbor, but i think you have a profound impact on my privacy and my light. the other aspect is the barbecue grill. i know it has gotten short shrift. but if someone is going to put a grill right on a light well and start burning things there -- i

know what they plan that in the description. of course it is going to impact my house, my bedroom, my clothes, and my bathroom. all i am asking is a tiny solution, which is move it back in just a couple of feet, which would be a simple resolution and would not cause any substantial impact on the neighbors, but would have a substantial benefit to me. >> i would like to point out one thing, using the photos that the permit holder has supplied. if you look at this shot of my deck, which is really the backyard, you can see a sliver of sunlight that comes through. that is what i am trying to protect.

if you see the sloped roof that is mentioned, the reason there is not a light well is i sloped the entire roof of the building for the previous homeowner, so they would have a lot of light. they actually have views out of their bathroom. that is a lot more expensive kind of a change then we are asking tonight. thank you. commissioner fung: i have a question for mr. strasburg. the windows in your light well lead to what rooms? >> one is a bathroom. another is our large closet, our changing room. commissioner fung: you have windows on all three walls? >> it is a light well. up like that? okay. president garcia: this is the

bedroom? >> that is my sequence. >> we have three minutes of rebuttal now for the permit holder. if you have anything more. commissioner fung: this is from the permit? >> we do not have any notes that say we are going to burn food on the roof. what we do have is a picture of a gas grill with a lid on it. and notes about how far that has to be from the property line to ventilate properly. most of these gas grills have these hoods on them. i do not understand how that is

when to affect these rooms. privacy wise, we are standing even further away from the railing the new would be. and it sounds like the bedroom is the point of concern for privacy. unless you are going to stand on top of the grill, how are you going to see into this room? we are not putting a deck on the back of that roof. the plans that she references for the resale of the home -- they did not show a deck on the back of the roof. they showed how you could add a roof deck exactly where i am adding this roof deck. the only intent of the stairs is to make it easier for someone to get out of the house. that is it. president garcia: that is the reason for the second door? >> the door on front lead to out to the deck. the other is mechanical access,

surface access. we could do a gate. but the way we had drawn the plans, we made it expand over toward the wall of a light well. we could have jogged the deck around the light well. our railing continues straight across. it does not jogged in on the side. there is not room for a gate there. if we pulled it back, it would be unsafe to get through. at some point, you are pulling the grill further and further into the usable part of the deck. the door is the easiest of this point of access. we have windows in the penthouse already facing the other property. if there are privacy issues, it is just as viable as a point of voyeurism as any of them.

they are existing on the part of the roof we are not using. commissioner fung: 2 below questions. is there gas piping going to the bedroom? -- two questions. >> yes. we planned for a gas line to come up behind it. you can barely see it. commissioner fung: is there anything magical about the location? could it not be against the wall? >> kevin robinson, owner of 2756. we would be also willing to move the location of the rail -- of the grill. it may just be a charcoal weber that is on wheels. we could move it from the south wall of the deck to the north side. commissioner fung: as a

technical question, the rail that you placed with your northern neighbor is correct in that if you moved it over a foot or so, we would have an automated rail. >> there is a security grilse of the lower neighbor cannot get to the roof. -- grill so the lower neighbor cannot get to the roof.

it is only 2 we will feet between the -- two feet between the rail and the door, and you need three feet. commissioner fung: you need only one leaf of the door. shift it. >> but if we ship it, we are in the 2 foot 10 region. i am getting the fire regulation -- the people who would be using the gate would be able to go through the gate downstairs. this is the widest point of access. i no longer meets my fire egress. keep in mind the top 18 inches -- it is only the lower 30

inches. we are already three feedback. -- three feet back from the property line. president garcia: what time of day was that picture taken? >> probably around 2:00. president garcia: what month? >> this was pretty recent. it was after we had started meeting with them. that is december light, or january light. president garcia: this is east? commissioner fung: that is west. president garcia: thanks. >> thank you.

is there anything further from the department? commissioners, unless you have other questions, the matter is submitted. commissioner fung: the easy one is to relocate the barbecue. president garcia: all right. let's go home, then. commissioner fung: since we have new commissioners, they have never heard me say this before. i am probably the only commissioner here who is not heavily enamored with refects-- roof decks, given that in an urban setting you need the open space, but you also have the potential for a lot of

irritation and potential impact, both noise and perhaps now. i do not see that as a big issue. -- perhaps smell. i do not see that as a big issue. people on the roof potentially creates problems. and of the zoning administrator and i have had this discussion many times. i always wondered why there was not some type of limitation on the size of the roof? -- of roof decks. there is no correlation between roof deck size and open space requirements. since this building is a condo and that the agreement is that the bottom unit gets the rear yard and the top unit gets the roof deck -- most of us in

multiple units in san francisco use the rear yard for our open space. but it has become very popular to have roof decks. i am sure it is not only just for you, but they had been above, which critics assert an atmosphere. -- which creates a certain atmosphere. i am not above requesting it be set back. president garcia: how much would you propose? commissioner fung: i would say probably a foot, foot and a half. commissioner hillis: i guess my only issue on that would be that the light well adjacent to the

double doors -- i get the point that it starts to impede into this 2 foot 10 area. would you be able to set that back? would you be able to set that back? i do not know if we can do that. they need the space for egress. commissioner fung: we can ask the building department. i am not sure i agree with her interpretation, to see that as the required egress. >> i did hear that comment. the the 6 inches, when we are talking clear with -- 36 inches seems narrow. 36 inches, in this case, is

usually ok. that is from what i remember. i would go between the post and the corner wall. it looks like it has got plenty of room, if that is what we are talking about. commissioner fung: if the door shifts, it probably improves that. >> we do not need the double leaf. i do see one other issue with regards to it. the door swings over the step. that would not be allowed. there some issues there that i could talk to the architect about later. commissioner fung: the deck will have a landing? >> it will need one. that is right. president garcia: please do not do that. if you need to address the board or mr. duffy -- >> i can speak to the architect

myself. i just thought i would mention it. it is a tripping hazard, actually. thank you. president garcia: i will probably go along with moving the rails somewhat. i think it is reasonable to move the grill. and want to say this as nicely as possible. if your neighbor is going to barbecue, even if it is three stories below you, given the wind blowing the right direction -- it is not a safety issue. the light, air, privacy -- i do not know. it seems as though most of this is upright. i do not know if anyone is

guaranteed a view, like, or even air. as for privacy, and hope to make this as gentle as possible -- that is pretty much what window treatments are for. at any rate. do you want to make a motion, commissioner? do you have any comments, commissioner? commissioner hurtado: i think i am in agreement with commissioner garcia. it would have been nice to have reached a compromise. i would support a motion to move the grill, but that is about it.