property the very first thing she did was to correct all the violations. she's working with the planning staff and naturally, i wouldn't be standing here with a room fuel of people working with her neighbors. here we're going today. thank you >> okay. we'll bring it up to public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners. commissioner >> this is before us because - well de facto demolition but there's the test as far as the

for a fact level which it wouldn't be before us. >> excuse me. are you referring to the test of whether the 1.4 million would price auto. >> yes. >> just clarifying that not that it matters i support the project and i think it makes sense to go about it in the right way and making a big improvement what was previously there. i would move to approve >> second. >> well - commissioner if you don't mind me advising our - i not approve it.

>> on that (calling names) so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and place you open the next item for 1165 fulton street mandated discretion review. >> good afternoon, president fong and councilmembers. mary woods. the 340u7b9d consideration is for a merger request the project meets the majority of the 5 crazy and the departments recommendation is for approval. we have a approval letter in support of the proposed merger. staff does not receive any

letters in opposition to the merger. this concludes my report if you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them >> project sponsor. >> good afternoon, commissionersdipsia with rubin and rose. i'm here today on behalf of the owners. those folks recently bought i bought the prototyping property to update the interior to live next door. the building is in the alamo's historic district directly across from alamo's square it's one of the oldest buildings on the square. can you have the overhead, please >> so you can see it's that gem

that was built in 1888. the commission unanimously approved the exterior renovation over the summer the association supports it and there are no oppositions from the neighborhood. we are asking you not merge 4 bedroom units. as you heard from mary the original building had two units. those were owned and occupied from 1955 onward. in 2007 the matriculating sold it f to my clients. to speak to the issues that were

raised there were no evictions whatsoever that occurred there was an elder tenant that passed away and her unit is vacant. the project is also an cross the board improvement. whether you compare it to a 3 unit project or the 2 units and the graphic sunlight showing very well but the green is consistent with zone and the red is not. is it better complies with parking and open space dwelling

exposure as well as here. you want to know why we're reducing it down from 3 to 2 units. this is john who's in his 70s he has limited mobility. and he might need an elevator. this building is intended for a family that's not in the business of renting. there's some practical lay out issues and the architect can address that. again, we meet a majority of the criteria and respectfully ask for your approval. thank you >> okay opening. >> and a actually, the architect. >> okay. great - >> hi, i'm patrick perez.

just a followup with demanding the scope of the work is a restoration for the facade and full innovation for the building. the c a was approved earlier this year and the commission was quite pleased. it's clearly one of the last buildings on the block. the square has been going over a revival. the revision to the front facade will include a or more of an unsightly fire escape are aluminum windows and we bring back a grant that is for the second floor.

internally we're proposing to renovate the upper floor it opens up a space and the upper levels it will be to create a larger unit. over the years the spaces have been divided in order to have a better floor plan. our desire is to improve about that. >> thank you, sir your 7, 8, 9 is up. >> one more it possible note ask specific questions any public comment? >> any public comment on this item. >> i'm andy forest i'm an engineer i'm not aware of this project it happens i was the engineer for this house. i'm happy to see that his dad

might be living next door he's a great guy. i'm sure they'll do a nice job on this project >> any member of the public wish to speak on this item. >> sometimes a small town. >> commissioner. >> well, i think this is an excellent project and i'm very supportive. they're doing a great service to the city and a rather than just doing the merger and they're taking off the shingles and the aluminum windows and restoring the windows to a lot of the 1880 beauty. i think that this probably in my opinion qualifies under all 5 categories staff didn't agree begin but on the prevailing

zoning in the easier is rh 3 but if you have 4 units you're not 90 in conformity with the zoning by doing going to 3 your - there's the prevalence so in case i think they satisfy that one fwroo. the instrumental u structural is brought about by the fire escape issue if we e they can't do the fire escape the egress would have to remain is it ruins the side of the this in any case there's structural problems their addressing. the families been there since the 50s i understand and both the parents are going to reside

in the larger and the wives parents in the smaller. unfortunately, we don't valley e evaluate what the original how is it of the designed two families it was two unit they were both fairly good size so it restores to it's original version and to receive the historic district certification it's a very good project. and i'd move to not take the rshths and approve the merger >> second. >> on the motion commissioners to not take dr and approve the project (calling names)

so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and place you on item for an for case 2013 at the 10 desoto street there was an interpreter request and he's in the audience. >> good afternoon commission the proposal is for a 2 store residence with the ocean view neighborhood zoning district property it's he located on the east side of desoto street. the addition would project 34

feet into the rear yard with a setback on the north and south side. the rear yard will be reduced and the total area will increase from 11 thousand seven hundred 64 square footage. the dr. was filed and it is developed into two single story retains. the design has been reviewed and they determined it's been consistent with the guidelines and doesn't create an extraordinary set bank. it will have no impact on the

property line. after the addition the subject building will be in the dr filers 15 foot yard abuts the joining subject property. 5 feet is the not that i can recall set back and it's in this district with the weight of a parcel therefore the 21 foot separation and the windows on the south side wall of the dr requesters house will not have impacts on the light. the debt of the residence will be the average side to the south and north and therefore have no impacts and therefore the planning department has

determined this is not a negative impact to the dr residents and the planning department should not take discretionary review >> dr requester you have 5 minutes. >> good afternoon commissioners any public comment? i'm john, i live on desoto. we do have a few wishes the project. just some general procedural issues we were not given any notice of the meeting with the homeowners association and they approved it at that time, we didn't have an opportunity to present our objections to that.

and i think that limited some of our options. secondly there's never been any meaningful discussions with the develop developer. the developer we talked about our objections and we actually proposed a modification to it and as far as i know that was rejected. and, in fact, all 3 different options that were talked about in this period are actually in our police station for design reviews this was not something new or something we didn't do. basically, we're saying is that the size of the project is really impacting the light and openness on our house. it's not specifically in conflict with anything in the design guidelines but i'm going

back to the general plan and saying this is important to us. it's mentioned in the planning code as something that's important. will what i'm going to do is give you a quick visual overview. this is the view of our property. i'm taking an example of the window from this view from the dining room the eastern most window in the dining room. it's the one that has the least impact on the lower floor of this project. the upper floor windows are not a problem because no one is looking out of the window there's enough sunshine it's only the bottom one that's a

problem. if we take a look at from that diagram window that's essentially, what we see. it's not a great view >> lltsz up the room. if the proponents project is developed that's essential the view. mr. forest is correct i'm not very good with the photo shots i'm trying to show the size of the impact. and if you look at mr. forests plan his house will basically have the same view out that we're not going to be able to have. earlier i mentioned a proposal that we put forth that was never

really discussed with mr. forest. i talked to him about that once and he never respond but if that's true we would still villaraigosa a lot of that house and a a lot of sunlight on the first day of winter we'll lose will 78 percent of the sunlight. i think it's significant enough that merits consideration even though is it doesn't rile come into conflict with the guidelines of the planning department. thank you >> thank you. is there that i any public comment? seeing none, project sponsor you have 5 minutes

>> how does that work? >> you place it face up and st. tv. >> the debt of my clients are here, ms. judy low and we have an interpreter. i thought on interpreter would be appropriate. the exit debt of my clients home is 27 feet >> it's around where i am to where you are that's the existing debt and the adjacent home next door is 70 feet in

length. this is the picture that tells all right here. (inaudible) >> he need to speak into the microphone. >> you can see the size of my clients enemy also the size of the home to the south. we did advertise and have the preapplication the whole neighborhood showed up we we were surprised that the neighbors to the north didn't show up. so certainly the dr requester was aware of that and 3 and a half months have begun but we meeting met in the dining room which the pictures that the dr requester is showing you folks that's the one room that has the most draufkd impact. it must be south fagdz room.

there are many more side windows in the home. i thought that would be important to note. what's remarkable about this project their home is over 20 feet set back from the estimation that we're putting in. it happened to have a 15 foot driveway and we're set back 6 feet from the property line. that's about 21 feet. to me that's pretty remarkable. i would not imagine the wind and a privacy there's no privacy issues there's no windows open that side. so in essence what's remarkable is that the homes are large we have a short home we're adding

on an estimation that mire clients are going to be renovating and the dr requesters home is deeper into the lot than we are. it's hard to grasp the concept that we have an extraordinary openness on their home and my client wants to develop their home to the point where it's works for them and that's pretty much the situations. thank you very much. any public comment in support of the project sponsor. okay. seeing none you have a two minute rebuttal >> thank you. i really have

nothing more to say. i said we're not concerned with any of the discussions concerning the guidelines we're seeing we're impacted in terms of the openness as shown by the pictures. we have no objections to the wind or the privacy issues. we never have. we're just concerned that we're going to lose a lot of openness and light and the calculations have shown that to be true and thank you >> thank you. project sponsor you have two minutes >> thank you. again what's remarkable we over offered concessions. we offered to have a float roof.

and we offered to set back the second floor 8 and a half feet to open up the rear area so people's 3 they could have a view of the hienldz to the south it's remarkable. okay. the public hearing portion it closed >> yeah. i have a few questions this is actually in eagle side terraces it's not in ocean view so it doesn't matter. is the project sponsor going to require a rear yard variants well, it's a dnr so their capable how about the

neighboring house even though it's already present there they're in conformity with the rear yard were with exception the dnr fielders sits on the side property >> and then my other question this is for occupancy they had an address this is their present resident this is not for resale but for occupancy? this stretch is >> come to the podium, please. >> you need to speak into the microphone. >> what is the question. >> well, the question is it's a little bit cuffing there of the a dale wood address that was listed for project sponsored. >> what address.

>> dale wood. it has large homelands in the areas >> i'm not understanding there was another address for who? >> dale wood is the steep street. >> oh, that's where we live now. >> oh, their movie from there. >> yes. as far as i know. >> and this plan includes only one kitchen i assume. >> absolutely. >> it's a lot of square footage but that's how it's designed. >> there's some big homes. >> some are. thank you >> i appreciate those are my only questions. i don't see the impact, you know, so long as they are common i mean it would be nice if there

was, you know, a little bit shorter going back there but it doesn't have to be as far as the guidelines we have it's in conformity and there was a pretty good separation from their houses and the dr requesters house >> commissioner moore. >> in order to deemphasize the faxing impact there's landscape between the two might hoping help to deal with not making things look so stark so i suggest to both parties to talk to each other and find a way to daily with the landscape on both

property to negotiate those greens and side it a positive impact. i don't find the addition wrong or unskillful to not take dr approval >> second and a commissioner. i want to reinforce that the project sponsor could work with staff and to device some kind of landscaping. i know that would be deserve not making it a condition at this point but - >> we can look at that commissioner. >> commissioner. >> yeah. i had a question for project sponsor. i know you mentioned the idea of a set bank is that still on the

table >> i want to jump on board the 6 foot set back we had 5 and i can't remember from the hr dr decision so we're set back at least 6 feet. >> so the set back has occurred. >> absolutely. absolutely that's a beautiful idea at all skinny became but 6 feet is a lot to work with. we have my clients here right now we can ask them >> thank you there's no need. >> thank you. commissioners if there's nothing further there's a motion and second not to take dr on that project (calling nam)