custom light, we will be forced into darkness and shadow with only the side of a disproportionately large structure to stare at. additionally a third story would intrude on my privacy as the windows and balcony will look directly into my bedroom. due to its position in the neighborhood, the building will sit high on a slope directly behind me and would be a light blocking monolith which would capture all the light for one resident while denying light to those around it. i am opposed to -- i am not opposed to a person enlarging and improving his home, however, i believe that the property at 84 city view has the opportunity to grow down or to the rear. this would have very little impact on the neighbors and neighborhood. however, as proposed, the impact is far too great, far too oppressive, and far too [speaker not understood]. submitted on behalf of officer douglass farmer. thank you very much. >> thank you.

next speaker, please. hi, commissioners. i'm terry thompson. i live in the neighborhood and i'm on the homeowners association board. i'm here opposed to the third story for a couple very simple philosophical reasons. i know that views aren't preserved, and i don't see why that should be. but beside that, there are far more people here that are negatively impacted than those that will be positively impacted. so, it's a very common sensical thing to see the negatives outweigh the positives. we're trying to preserve our neighborhood. as all the speakers before have said, 90% of the neighborhood is two-story. when you start making things

more dense, parking problems come along with that. i think it's a very sad and selfish view that the people that want to expand won't compromise and go back but would rather just build up into somebody's light. and i think it's extremely unfair to see and all the negatively impacted neighbors. i think it's just a very simple and common sensical argument that if the pros don't outweigh the negatives, you shouldn't approve t. i ~ it. i understand you are motivated by selling permits, expansions, tax revenue. i think as those values go up, and you gain that, the values

of the other homes around devalue. so, basically that's it. and i hope that you will take a second look at this and respect many of the neighbors that are negatively impacted. thanks. >> next speaker, please. good evening, president fong and the rest of the members of the commission. first of all, i take offense to the remark about driven for revenue and stuff. i'm a city employee. i'm just joking about that part. any ways, my name is david [speaker not understood] and i live at 83 cityview way directly across the street. i've lived in the neighborhood quite a long time with my family. i talked to the applicant for the project. even years back when he had a problem with his car, myself and someone here tonight

opposed to the project, we went over and helped him with his car and starting his car [speaker not understood]. it's a little neighborhood where everyone does things for everybody and like a lot of the neighborhoods in the city, we're not the only one. my house was expanded prior to me moving in, but it was expanded backwards. and i still have a huge yard. all these houses here have big back yards. it's not like you're losing your backyard if you were to expand in our neighborhoods if you look at the different layouts you have of it. one thing when i first came in contact at one of the meetings that the applicant had at his house with the architect, the architect told me this was a small expansion. it was one bedroom and one bath on the roof, upstairs. i told him -- after i looked at the blueprint, it seems like somebody is not being told the truth here. he quickly corrected minimum self-saying it was a 11 or 1200

foot expansion. how he could tell me that is kind of deceptive the way some of these things have gone on in this particular project. you know, i know it's happened in the past and bylaws have been broken and the city didn't adopt the bylaws. if it's happened in the past and the bylaws have been broken, does that mean wrongs in the past are okay? somebody does something wrong and now we're trying to stop it. one thing that caught me a couple weeks ago, one people who voted in favor of the project not here now received a gift from him, you know, received flowers brought over to their house. i know we're not buying votes, but if that's what it's come to, we don't have a chance. thank you very much for listening. i appreciate it. >> thank you. good afternoon, my name is

waynn foley, i live at 79 cityview way. i'm reading a letter of somebody who can't make it here due to physical disability. it's theron and copina wyatt. it goes, i'm a disabled veteran with mobility and balance problems. i suffer from ray nods' disease, you suffer with your hands and feet and it's cold. it is painful when the weather is cold. my opposition to the addition at 84 city view is it will block most of the morning sun off the back of my house at 206 panorama drive. it blocks most of the sun for most of the morning now until about 11:00 a.m. when it is directly overhead. the addition of an extra story will block even more sun. also the existing structure already provides an unobstructed view of the back bedrooms and the addition of

another story will provide three more windows with a clear view into the bedrooms causing privacy problems. i strongly oppose this addition as it is not according to midtown terrace bylaws which states that no third stories are permitted. [speaker not understood]. and i do live right across the street from the proposed addition. and we did expand, but we did expand downstairs and it's the existing footprint of the house. thank you. >> are there other speakers in support of the d-r requestor? okay, seeing none, project sponsor. good afternoon, commissioners. myname is michael woods. i'm an attorney with [speaker not understood], the homeowner

of 84 cityview way. ~ and before you, you have a packet for opposition of the discretionary review. and the proposed wrote et was proposed constructed vertical [speaker not understood] and residential rh-1 zoning district. [speaker not understood] and his family have been living at 84 cityview way for 15 years. he also owns a restaurant nearby on west portal. as a homeowner and small business owner, he's financially, physically, and emotionally vested in the neighborhood. he has a son five years old and is just about to start grade school. he is not planning to go anywhere any time soon. nothing short of a model citizen during his time in the neighborhood. he is current on homeowner association dues. several homeowners are several years delinquent. he takes pride in his home and takes pride in his home while other residents do not. his hedges are trimmed and paint job is pristine.

the proposed addition as you can see from the packet is visually pleasing. yet for some reason the board on the homeowners association is attempting to deny him the right given to other dozens of homeowners in the midtown terrace neighborhood. further, he's been denied that right after being assured by the midtown terrace homeowners association president that he would be able to move forward with his home addition. mr. vequa and his architect are made monthly if i indications to the plans, raising a window facing east in order to minimize the privacy impact on his neighbor. not only was [speaker not understood] approved by the association president, its was approved by the residential

design team, residential design guidelines of the san francisco planning code. [speaker not understood] it is not the tallest in the neighborhood nor does it have the most square footage. further, another home in the neighborhood has four stories. i believe that the issues were laid out in and aces doctored the in the d-r to the extent ~ that it's quite clear that he is being denied the right. here are examples of other third story homes all over the neighborhood. and similar -- the people here opposing the project live on panorama and city view streets. but there are three current three story homes on those streets. further, this particular block is somewhat unique to the neighborhood as it is a long

fence. as you can see, the fence next door to the subject building all the way down. and they're having studies done to residents on panorama who are down at the bottom of the hill past the fence and that the shadows at the worst time of year, in october, are gone by 9:30 a.m.. as to the [speaker not understood], the neighborhood character, building is scale to form and architectural features, the impact is minimal. additionally, as the residential design guidelines state, some offer light and privacy is expected in building in areas with [speaker not understood]. this is an area with dense building pattern.

thank you. >> okay. now calling on speakers in support of the project. i have two cards, gordon at kin son and michael woods. hi, i'm michael woods. >> is there a gordon atkinson? were there any other speakers in support of the project? yes. my name is gordon atkinson, i'm the architect of the project. i just wanted to clear up -- clarify the issues surrounding the impact of the sunlight on the homes to the rear of the house and to the side. mr. kwan's window on the west side of his house, he has one window on that side which is the only window and one small

room in the house. and it's unfortunate, but there's no other way to add another story to [speaker not understood] house without affecting the light and views from that window. i worked with him on the design of the building and we relocated and changed the size of the window opposite. based on his request. and we arrived at a mutually agreeable solution ~ and he assured me that he was happy with the resolution and would withdraw his objection to the project. evidently he's changed his mind since then. as far as the -- mr. wyatt who lives on panorama below, who waynn just read the letter from, i wrote him in response to his concerns on september

11th and i quote from the letter. i wrote to him, on the [speaker not understood] is the shadow cast by our addition will reach grade at the rear of your house shortly before 9:00 a.m. the shadow will proceed to disappear from your rear wall earlier and earlier until mid june when it will cease entirely to cross your home. after the fall equiknox, the shadow will leave at 9:30 and continue to leave earlier and earlier, solstice it will be past your house at sunrise. [speaker not understood] only he early morning hours and it will appear in the rear yard, not on the house itself. and they keep mentioning the fact that he could expand his house towards the rear.

there's a lot of problems with that, but one thing is that if we did, that would create a larger and longer shadow on their buildings behind, at least the house to the rear. so, it would be worse than it is now. in that respect as we notice other problems with the rear, we have photos in the packet of his rear yard which is [speaker not understood] developed and we know spaces [inaudible]. and he wants to preserve his rear yard. >> thank you. thank you. >> thank you. are there any other speakers in support of the project? okay, seeing none, d-r requestor, you have a two-minute rebuttal. thank you once again. i do want to rebut the claim that was made that there was

approval given to this project by the president of the new terrace homeowners association. when the [speaker not understood] there was no president. the office was vacant. the project was brought to the board by a former president who assured mr. [speaker not understood] that the project would be approved. however, the midtown terrace homeowners association requires plans in writing and we never received a copy of the plans. we were expected to make a decision in a 30-minute meeting and we simply could not do that given the impacts. i think the rest of the neighbors have spoken eloquently and we stand where we stand. thank you. >> thank you. project sponsor, you have a two-minute rebuttal. the bylaws that a lot of the opponents of the project are talking about have already

been broken 25 times. they never explained why these other homes were allowed to have a third story addition or in one case a fourth story addition. another by law is a quality that the property rights and interest members of the association and the property association shall be equal, which clearly isn't the case here if they're attempting to deny it, mr. [speaker not understood] the opportunity to add a third story to his home. additionally, i heard someone say 2%. 25 houses out of i believe 810 is more than 2%. and mr. wooden, there were no plans at the time, at the time he was a former president. it's reasonable to me if he brings it up to the board, he is the acting president. lastly, just to go on what mr. at kin son said, the alternatives to extending out are more detrimental to shadows to the people living on

panorama view ~. and also extending out is a violation of planning code as it won't allow a conversion of a garage into living space. thank you. >> thank you. okay, the public hearing is closed and opening it up to commissioners. commissioner antonini. >> yeah, it seems like we always hear our cases and we have three cases that are all in elevated areas of the city in a row here. just a coincidence that it came out that way. but it's been pointed out that the ccnrs for midtown terrace, there are some situations in certain neighborhoods where the city -- the neighborhoods were able to codify their -- certain parts of their ccnrs. they're fairly limited, bernal heights, west wood are a couple that come to mind, but these are not. there are many instances where the city has allowed a third

floor addition, as was mentioned, 25 of them over the years. the other thing that's interesting is a lot of these streets are on hills and what happens in this instance is if the additional floor is added, then it brings the height of the structure even or close to the height of the house that's on the uphill side. but those of us ho live on flat land are faced with this instance all the time because we derive our light from the front of the house and the rear of the house, even if our houses are detached. so, it's sort of a bonus if you're on a hill and there also is a staggering hill because then you're getting light because of the fact that you have the elevations that cause degradation of houses. there can be plenty of lights to the homes the front and the rear. and i frequently drive through midtown terrace on my way to work and i'm very aware of the

different streets and the light it gets particularly in the morning hours. and i notice that staff did not feel this would have been referred to the commission under their new policy if that policy were to. been in effect where the staff would have made the decision, but that's not the case. this [speaker not understood] has been here for a long time. he's been an owner since 1998. ~ owner realistically he has a family that's growing and getting older. they need separate bedrooms. it certainly makes it nicer to have that kind of thing. you know, the fact that it's over 2000 square feet is not that extraordinary. the idea is we have to look at is what's the impact to the adjacent properties and is it proper to allow this to be built. oftentimes, and it was also pointed out by the architect that the addition to the rear would also have shading

problems with other homes or the same homes, perhaps even worse than the addition in height. so, and the other issue that was raised was privacy. and we almost all have situations where in, from our windows, we look into someone else's window. and we usually have to put the shade up if you want privacy and close it. that's kind of what you have to do when you're fairly close, and this is further away than a lot of places are. so, i don't really see anything extraordinary in this d-r request. >> commissioners, anything else? >> i have one question. >> commissioner sugaya. >> why is it not possible to push out to the back, except for the deck and the gazebo thingy? there's no architectural reason you couldn't go out to the back. [speaker not understood].

>> sure. of course, it's possible to the back. it causes numerous problems. as i said before, extensively develop the rear yard already. you can see the photos of the rear yard and the packet. so, he would have to sacrifice rear yard space. that was the main reason. now, if we tried to put a extension behind the house, then there's issues with the other bedrooms that you're covering up. they have to have egress window. they have to have required light and ventilation which are difficult to get from the side and it would just make it architecturally a very difficult sacrifice, the quality of space in the other rooms below.

so -- >> thank you. commissioner antonini. >> yeah. the other question, the other thing that came up, i think, what do we have, 25 foot frontage? what's the frontage on this house? hyde is this house? -- how wide is this house? >> i believe it's -- it's 34 feet. >> 34 wide. it's a little wider than most. but adding to the rear, you come up with the idea -- it was pointed out about the windows would have to be replaced, but then you also have the instance of adding hallways unless you make these rooms like sun rooms where you have to walk through one room to get into the other room. so, it's a little bit difficult sometimes to do that kind of an addition. so, i see there are other commissioners that have some comments.

i was going to move to not take d-r and approve the project. >> commissioner hillis. >> i just have a couple comments. i think we've got a high bar here on d-r, exceptional extraordinary circumstances, which is hard to reach. some comment on the design, though, and you showed a lot of projects of like 3-story buildings in the neighborhood or addition. none of which look great. we probably regret these years later if i was on the planning commission and approved some of these. my comment is about design. i don't think you were insensitive to the building in the neighborhood as you could be kind of with the deck and [speaker not understood], i don't know if there's a way to look at that or fix that. but, you know, it stands out like some of these remodels that have been done. i think we've seen projects that are a little more sensitive to the character of the neighborhood. i don't have an objection

necessarily to the addition, i think more to the way it's being done. but i'll hear what others have to say. >> commissioner moore. >> i actually appreciate that comment because context is still what kind of sets something to be exceptional and extraordinary. the lot is rather large. the fact it has extensive build out in the backyard does not speak to how a building expands because with everything being equal, i would prefer a building which expands more in the rear yard without violating the required setback, but the line indicated on all the drawings shows there is quite a bit of room to go. what i am very concerned about is the addition of these two balconies standing the full width of the property to the street side where that is totally atypical. so, i would agree with commissioner hillis about that the building in its response to

an existing pattern, while it's not binding, it should in some form or another kind of play with that recognition and i don't think that is particularly done here. >> commissioner sugaya. >> just a comment on commissioner hillis' comment. on those other buildings. i mean, in recent times i don't think any of those have come before the commission. but the point is that they didn't have to come before the commission. this wouldn't have come before the commission but for the discretionary review. so, the other ones were all constructed, you know, with building permits and all of that stuff. and unless there happened to be a discretionary review, it would have never come to -- those of other ones would have never come to the commission anyway, so. >> all right, commissioners. i think we have a motion, but i didn't catch a second. was there a second?

>> second. >> we have a motion and a second to not take d-r and approve the project. on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> no. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? is absent. is commissioner fong? >> aye. >> okay, that motion passes with 6 yes and 1 no -- sorry, 5 yes, 1 no, and one absent. and that, commissioners, is the last item on your regular calendar. we'll now move into general public comment which happens at the end of every planning commission hearing. at this time members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except for agenda items. >> is there any general public

comment this evening? >> i have noed cards. >> okay. seeing none, the meeting is jour. adjourned. [adjourned]

>> call to order this meeting, on june fourth, would you like to cal roll? >> director brinkman? >> present. >> heineke is expected. ed >> ramos fp >> present. >> rubke >> director. privileges and nolan will be not at this meeting you do have a quorum. >>