i'll be quick. the simple idea is that when i stamped in my heels at five feet back, i can still see in the bedroom window and i don't think that's going to solve that. that's the concern basically that we have. we played the sectional game back and forth to retrieve the edge of the deck and make the edge of the deck solid. and somebody who is shorter than i am is perfectly cut off at the five foot length. somebody who is as tall as i am or taller has a straight shot. and i think there's just a simple question of what is a reasonable approach to this, what is the intent of the planning code to allow this kind of habitation of an otherwise unused flat roof area. and that's all i have to offer. thank you. >> thank you. okay, the public hearing portion is closed.

commissioner sugaya. >> yes, it's a difficult case, i think, for the commission because you kind of have to say on the one hand if you just look at what the architect's presented as just land use issues, or setback issues or residential design guideline issues, or whatever, then it probably isn't extraordinary. but there seem to be other circumstances that we're always faced with. so, on the one hand, i think as a bedroom, since it's off the bedroom and if we assume that the project sponsor is going to live there for quite a long period of time and he's old enough that he's not going to

grow very much taller, he's, you know, the five foot setback would probably work. i don't know which lady in the back is your wife, but i assume she's not any taller than you are. so, from one standpoint you could argue that five feet might work in this case and still have enough livability on the deck. and i suppose -- and i don't know where to go with it exactly, but one idea might be to have -- although you may not want to go to the extent of spending the money for it, but you could have the roof deck as a deck and only pull the railing back five feet. and then at some future date -- and i'm trying to be sensitive here. at some future date, either the

if this owner leaves, you're not going to sell your house since you've been there for 30 years. there might be a time in the future when there could be some extension or something like that. but that's neither here nor there. i don't know where to go with it actually. i'd like to hear more discussion among the commissioners. >> commissioner antonini. >> well, i have some thoughts on this. i don't really care what the relative size is if the deck is relative to the other decks in the area. it's whatever is suiting the project sponsor. it looks like -- i'm not sure if this is 25 by 10. it looks like it probably runs the width of the house almost, and then i would assume it's about -- our project architect, is it 10 foot --

>> yeah, 25 by 12. >> please come to the podium. >> yeah, just tell me what the dimensions are. the setback from both -- the setback from one side property line approximately 4-1/2 to 5 feet. and the adjacent space happens to be above the street which is the series of steps, which is also one of the reasons why we can have the deck up against that property line and it's open to the public. >> right. what are the dimensions? it's probably in our paperwork. i believe it's 20 by -- >> [speaker not understood]. >> okay, thank you. the point is the 12 because i was thinking 25 by 10, but now, you know, because as you start to pull the thing back, particularly five feet, you start getting into a really small situation. your distance from the house, if you want to put a picnic table there, you want people sitting around it, you've got to have room for the table, room for the chairs. and, so, you know, it makes it difficult to have enough room

to maneuver around there. it's not impossible, but it makes it less desirable. we've got 45 -- 43-1/2 feet of separation as was mentioned between the house, the d-r requestor's house and the location on the deck. even detached homes in san francisco frequently have -- if they're lucky -- three-foot separations. in the case of my house, which is in a detached neighborhood on the west side, three foot on each side. so, if i've in one of the rooms looking south, my neighbor is in her bedroom there, we have the windows open and mine are open, and we can see each other. i mean, it comes with urban living, but this is an extremely long area there. so, i don't know that the idea or the solution of the fence i don't think is a good one because it's only going to cut the light and air to the bedroom in question of the d-r requestor. probably you want to get as much light and air in there.

so, i don't see that as being a solution. but i'm not really sure that we need to cut a lot of size off of here. we have had situations often with our decks where we don't bring the railing all the way to the very end of the deck. it is -- i would entertain the possibility of recessing it a foot or, you know, two feet at the most away from there which still leaves you 10 feet. and that's enough room to maneuver around the table from the house to the side of the deck. >> commissioner moore. >> since this particular deck is off a bedroom, i think the possibility of having a dining room table with people sitting around the table is somewhat limited, although people might do it. i think i generally favor decks to not be flush with the building wall for reasons, one, outside elevation, but also for

reasons of [speaker not understood] the devil is in the details on that particular thing because not very -- if you have a solid [speaker not understood], do a good detail on the railing, it's not the easiest [speaker not understood]. i would be prepared to pull the deck two feet back and have that be a compromise. we do have a substantial separation, though, 45 feet plus a grade to front which by itself is a combination of the vertical as well as the slope distance, which makes it somewhat unlikely somebody to stand at the edge and intentionally stare down, that's not how life works. there is a sensitivity to the health of the neighbors. i'm sure the neighbors will not send their guests or themselves to the edge in order to stare down there. having said that, i would be

comfortable of taking d-r and asking for a two-foot setback off the deck to a 10 by 21.5 and leave it with that. >> is that a motion? >> it is a motion, yes. >> second. >> commissioner hillis? call the question. >> on that motion to take d-r and approve the project setting back the deck's depth by two feet, reducing the deck's depth 2 feet to 10 feet, on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> i'm sorry, i'm not sure if it's 10 feet or 10.5. >> 10 feet. >> is that correct -- >> i was pulling it back by two feet, that's correct. >> i think it was testified that the depth was 12.5. >> 12 and 12, 12 and 1 inch. >> 10 foot 1 inch, close enough. >> reducing the depth of the deck by 2 feet. on that motion, commissioner antonini?

>> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> no. >> and commission president -- excuse me, commission chair wu? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes by a vote of 5 to 1 with commissioner sugaya voting against. commissioners, that will place you on public comment. i have no speaker cards. >> is there any general public comment? okay. seeing none, meeting is adjourned. [adjourned] test,

test, test, test, test, test, test, test >> the preference commission. i'll to welcome everyone to the regular meeting for a thursday july 17th nevada's please be aware the commission doesn't allow any interruptions and do state your name for the record inform the where do you reside when you come up. i'd like to take roll

(calling names) commissioners first up it general public comment and i may have one speaker card. >> thank you katherine howard please. >> good afternoon katherine howard friends of the advocate groups. first of all, i want to thank you all for the golden gate park. we've been involved in the soccer project and for those people who have been living on mars we're replacing that with

the stadium lighting until 10 o'clock of every night of the year. we've been concerned about this project. we've had a lot of setbacks but we're all committed. we're not giving up. one of the things there is a beautiful new video about this impact of the park. the filmmaker maker was - he's an internationally known film mark. if you went down to the auditorium you'll see his work. he went out to the fields and

was so horrified by the project he made this video for us. it shows creativity financial services to the global entertainment industry. we have this on youtube so if you have four minutes i'll give you the link and people tell other people about it and please click like. thank you. again for your past support >> do we have anyone else that would like to speak only a temp that's not on our agenda. seeing none, public comment is closed. >> that will place you under directors announcements.

>> good afternoon tim frye on behalf of the director and department staff. the director's report is included in your packet. the department will be at sunday streets at the event where receipts can learn more about the projects of the city. also wanted to let you know about our first see participation on july 7th. one of the main features of our booth was a map of all the landmarks and it was definitely the most popular map on displays about 50 percent of the folks had never heard about the planning department.

it was definitely a beneficial endeavor to show them more about what the planning department does on a daily basis. as the mission sunday streets will be on july 28th and we'll forward you the fire department's for the rest of the year. and margaret from our staff will forward that information to you. that conclusions my comments on the director's report unless you have any comments >> item 2 the past events at the planning staff and announcements. >> department staff again. a couple of items to share with you. the 706 mission appeal as your aware the major permits for 76 mission was affiliated the board of supervisors.

the hearing was originally scheduled for july 8th at the request of the appellants and that meeting will be postponed. the millions police station for t the night gale was scheduled to live heard by the budget and a finance committee. i'm sorry. i'm totally blanking on whose writing the report but they needed a little bit more time to prepare their report and as a result that item was continued to july 24th and we'll be there at that meeting for approval of the contract. i also wanted to let you think

we kukd a sunset walking tour that was well received as part of our sunset survey and the survey finding in september we have have another walking to our tour on july 7th from 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and planning staff will be meeting those interested in the streets. we'll be posting posters around the community and sending invitations to all of the surveyor folks. a committee meeting will be held on thursday from 630 to 8:00 p.m. and the survey findings will be available and we will have interpreters on

staff to provide chinese translations to the members of the public it's a one-on-one for property issues to sit down at a location we're still looking for several locations win the neighborhood a member can sit down with the general planners and ask any general planning questions they have. finally i wanted to bring to your attention the task force report. we sent you a link to this report. earlier this week the department participated in the number of those meetings we proitdz the background of the departments process and the historic process and just a general overall

information about your program. the department reviewed the document and it was nice to receive recognition on a lot of achievements we've made in particular to increase public engagement and outreach. but there are a number of items in the report that h pc may want to discuss and we're happy to have that conversation first year if you're interested in scheduling a future point on the calender so everyone interested can use this as forum to report. this concludes the staff report and i'm happy to answer any questions >> two quick questions. first of all, who did it spur

report control from. i didn't get it >> margaret who would have september that a couple of days ago i'm happy

. >> i'm happy to answer any questions on say items we'll be bringing the work program to you at the end of this year. we've made process on this program and the commission may want to readjust some of the work on the program and direct staff to focus on others efforts

but overwhelm happy to answer my questions. in particular the two items that are likely to come to you in the near future is proposed for continuance today and we have a pro-beyond consultant for the sunshine school and we're working with her to see when she can prepare a report for the commission for approval. we've been in discussions with the school district. as of now their supportive of the designation so we're continuing to move forward on the report to get it to you as soon as we can >> tim, i want to ask a question about how do those projects get move forward forward in the department. i look at the report and it

looks like not much work was done on a particular item. i understand the consultant like one of these arouses u houses for example, who - how does it get assigned >> they're all in various you stages of development. if the owner reaches out to us and ready to engage us other times we are still doing researches. if there are any major movements that on the project we would list them here. to be honest i could not say there's a provided right now it's a matter of which ones are closed to completion.

the hall is ready and the building just to crossroads this year their locked in berkley and we've trying to set up a meeting to talk about the bends and responsibilities and hopes of their support. it's sort of those behind the scenes projects. but i could not say there's one pressing but if the commission were to direct us to work on one vs. another we'll do that. part of my question is, you know, a good number of those were added in 2011 and here we are two years ago later is that a normal path >> yes there are even to point out a couple of these that were

on the landmarks board such as the sunshine school i believe in either 2005 or 2006. so unfortunately, it takes some time to get those before the commission >> thank you. commissioner >> this is one thing we might consider we bring similar properties the first 3 are more than housing and whether they can be grouped together. i think what would be nice when this material becomes public it doesn't seem random like oh, some random house why now? is there a way the message could be talked through as we present the

material. >> and i know the messaging isn't random because most people are not aware of this part. >> and mr. frye who's doing the pro-beyond on central. >> former president of transport. >> any other questions regarding the landmarks seeing none. we'll move on >> commissioners that will place you under the president report and announcements. >> thank you. i have one thing to speak about is demanding schneider in the planning department has called a lose committee together called the sicken age to high rise - top of

high-ri high-rise signage. it - nothing has been decided but here's the items we're to talk about. it sounds it's going to be about once a month and jeff is on there as well. that's it for president's >> yes. i presume this is about signage blithe and it's multiple things. you know, mayor's office gets climates which someone times put up a sign so it's easy to see going down the street. it's an influx of signage requests and restrictions.

i know that mr. frye wants to speak on this it's got a more modern signage in the district >> tim frye department staff. the historic preservation commission we created signs for landmark districts and those may be part of the discussion on this committee but we tried to give the tenants the proper size and materials and as at least as we relate to the public realm and organizations >> that's all my comments for today. >> item 5 is the consideration of the draft minutes for june 13

june 13th nefdz. >> any public comments on the minutes. >> board approval. >> second. >> we'll take a vote. >> on that motion to approve the minutes for june 13 june 13 >> so move forward that passes and places you under comments and questions. >> commissioner pearlman. >> next wednesday there's an all day forum between the pummels and the port on the ports offices on sea.

i'll report after but if anyone else is interested given the interest ton sequa in the last few months >> yesterday's chronicle had an article on the photographs which were taken during the construction of the bay bridge in 1935 and 1936. i'm familiar with the photographs their staerlg. if you go during the daytime i can go safely you can take bart >> the subcommittee met on june 27th and we'll be