anybody have any idea i know their family sized housing but 7 lots for 6 units that's ridiculous. >> concerning your question about the rent controlled unit they'll remain rent control i sent a note to corey and he royals it's underdeveloped 8 not 6 that's the error at the beginning of this project the rent controlled unit b.a. can be expanded and more unit they can remain under rent control and if there's a conflict with creating for housing the priority policy says keep the remaining how's theres no conflict. >> considerably you can have lot a expanding and b built and

absolutely. >> that sound like a winner to me. >> much better this takes away and give us nothing. >> commissioner johnson. >> okay. i guess that was my question it was championing lot a appears to be pretty well designed project but the case is where the rent controlled unit are i'll say if that's a possibility point public defender's wants to expand the rent control units on lot a and modified the project on lot b with the rear yard and the ground floor but that's a continuing project so i'll leave it there. >> commissioner fong. >> i'm actually supportive of project but i understand

everyone's concerns there's a lot of projects this size or larger and this is nicely done this little piece of clement street is a growing commercial area and cool restaurant they've not been restaurant there but if you look at the bus line it's not purchase transit rich and from a walkable part this lower clement street and parts of geary serve a huge part of the city richard is comparatively small and from lake street to fulsome going out to directorship it's not easy to hop on a bus so i tie that into the parking that's difficult to

find parking at night i think it can be better here. >> thank you. i want to offer the city attorney an opportunity to weigh in i think on the rent control issue. >> deputy city attorney yes. i didn't want the commission to have the impression if 43 that building stays that will automatically remain from our represent control ordinance there's a provision if subsequential modifications are made. >> would we have that mobile device turned off. >> the owner there is a process the owner can have the rent control lifted from the knowledge i'm not familiar with the ordinance within your rent

control ordinance i wouldn't give you more advise but since the building is not being demolished those building have subject to rent control. >> we're also legally restricted they stay rent control. >> yes, sir, yes the state law there's exemption with when the city can ask the building to remain rent controlled there's limited exceptions. >> thank you commissioner moore. >> i'd like to ask mr. williams have you thought through a workable hybrid from our prospective. >> i haven't drawn up anything and obviously you can remodel it

out of rent cruel by the commission s can control it it will come back and if i look at it those unite are proposed to be maintained i survive over the years or they're all going to be done they're larger and family sized and remodeled out of existence you can especially stop it that's what aware here for. that's the priority policy the only policy right now >> so i'm concerned about the a ways way the unit are set up with extensive parking and we're starting to address that we are not even near affordable in my shape not only the low market rate those are basically

high-end unit to sell to people who can't afford the unbundled parking places and that's a concern to me. in the packaging it's in the aggressiveness of over parking i'd like to see a modification including addressing the proactively your contract with demolishing rented control issues >> commissioner antonini. >> well, i'm hearing from project sponsor we'll be willing to go down to 6 cars which is one-on-one which is actually that is required by code so it's not over park if you're code compliant if you want to have the 6 units have 6 opportunities to purchase you need 67 parking spaces they could seek a variance to have less parking but other thought we can't

require this but i'm going to through this out if those are for sale unit they're not subject to hawkins; is that correct city attorney. >> deputy city attorney marilyn burden cost requires rent control i'm curious to see and where i'm going with this. >> (laughter). it nighttime possible we used to have it's 9/11 unfortunate we had a policy that forced a 6 unit building to have one affordable unit for sale it was changed by the legislation by the voters that raised it up to 10 this is below the threshold, however, i'm not saying it would be a condition of approval but through might be a possibility

better than that dumping tiny rent control units one hundred percent tile but certainly be a better solution than trying to keep those rent control unit as they are nobody in they're right mind is going to leaving them we're going to disapprove the expansion to make them bigger there's a question of takings when i start deprofiling someone of reasonable run return on their property you're going above and beyond what the city

and counties are trying to do >> commissioner hillis. >> so i mean has the xhifshd it came to me earlier when i of the looking at it there's tricks i mean, we're all sensitive been rent control but in reality i thought through that what's going to happen a 3 unit building in the back and it will remain rent control it's going to be a ti. i think we're dealing with developers 2 unit vacant buildings i don't want to fool ourselves it this will be a building - a better designed project that gets you more units

and mr. williams i agree that it trumpets the additional oozed uses i'm leaning towards the projects i mean, i don't i prefer the parking be reduced at the garage left back that's why i land on it >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much. i also are to echo commissioner hillis's comments that's hard the directives is board additional unfortunately, when we look at project by project it is difficult to be one hundred percent consistent we have to look at project by project and what is best for the city and what's the intent that filters

down to the project and in this case, i think that having the large unit and more of that in the consistent project dental. >> and sort of it laps together a modified rent control which i agree with commissioner hillis again, it's not going to be rent control but tic. so i guess i'll be supportive of the basic the project as designed although i think we had slooth the waiver on the parking for that lot b on the ground floor. one question i have this is left turn the situation why the walk ups i didn't see an elevator in

lot a or b >> it really goes to the smaller nature of each of those units. the largest one is 15 or 16 sfooet square feet the elevator with the circulation takes up more space >> okay. i think that's challenging to say what you're to have family sized unit. >> soonls you have an elevator you trigger other things it takes up a lot more space. >> i've asked the question i gave an answer. >> commissioner antonini. >> i know their split-level which makes it easier if i'm not mistaken but anyway, it's not the important thing i'm going to make a motion to approve with the modifications of eliminating

the bumper out on b and making the garage two cars and keeping the 4 car garage on the other one and that will be also the rear yard would be captured at ground floor so that's basically the motion the project with those modifications. >> there's no further discussion. okay we have a motion and a second to approve this matter with conditions as amended to reduce the parking in lot b eliminating the bump out requirement reducing it to 2 spaces. commissioner antonini. commissioner hillis. commissioner johnson. commissioner moore. no. xhishd. no. commissioner fong. commissioner president wu. no arrest so moved,

commissioners, that motion passes 4 to 3 with richard and moore and wu voting against it >> zoning administrator what say you. >> it's the variance hearing also with an intent to approve. and very good commissioners that places you on our discretionary review portion item 13 was continued and so items 14 ab at 9 tentacle street a may or may not discretionary review in case. also for 9 tentacle street >> carolyn. good evening planning department

staff you have before you a question for the may or may not discretionary review for demolition pursuant to the planning code. it's located on carolyn street between 23 and 22 street in the katrero student it is to demolish a dwelling unit. the public notification was complete and no applications were filed, however, since the distribution of the pact staff has received additional letters and neighbors have expressed the concerns over the height and one neighbor has concerned asking concerns wanders to the windows on the side evaluation and the e-mails and letters are being passed out now.

the original project design is a 4 story and the staff look at the proposed the project was consistent with the sate h site and with the elimination of the top floor they reduced the project to 3 story over basement structure staff asks not to take discretionary review and approve that it's consistent with the general plan and the guidelines and the planning code that concludes my presentation. i'm available for questions and project sponsor. >> thank you. good evening commissioners john with the law firm of rose on behalf of the project sponsor see. the project will demolish an under sized omen and non-rent

controlled proposes to rfrpt that with the existing neighborhood the project requires mandate discretionary review for both the demolition of the existing structure and the new structure so quickly the existing structure is in poor condition not in an occupyable state no foundation rotten mold throughout and the electrical system is hazardous it's appropriate and preferable to demolish this and building or build a new home with the characters or character on the block let's get to the character on the block if i can get the projector. this is the exist undersized home a little bit set back from the street. as we move north we've got a two-story renal building immediately adjacent and at the

corner a 3 story residential building south we've got a home a one story home on a double lot and the next 3 buildings two and three story buildings with a 2 story building in between. this building is not going to stand out on this portion of the block not unionism but it's not the tallest building the tall itself on the corner you'll see that. installation also not the only building that's 3 stories at the street that continues back to the rear of the building. if you take a look at this photo this is faxing north this line represents where the rear of the project and we've got the two or three story buildings that meet

the same rear yard line there are two or three other stories that continue where the project continues i'll add here's a diagram you are blue sites are with 3 stories it's not the deepest building we've got the building at the corner that occupies the entire lot and the two-story building between the 3 story building that occupies the block birthday no means is this going to stand out. the adjacent neighbors are smaller than the project, however, the project impacts are limited if he looked at to the north neighbor again, here's the project site they've got no roof-deck so the project is not going to a have an impact and again, the project the rear wall

of the project expends basically to the rear of the deck it is basically at the rear end of the lot are going to be limited. speaking to the south nearby it is the one historic home on the double lot it allows for a greater separation between the two buildings and in addition the project provides proposes no windows on the side lot line no issues with privacy along that in their existing open space and i want to mention that the roof-deck a set back six feet on both sides and that diminishes the issues we're working with the down escape and we've

provided 25 feet at the rear the lot. the project sponsor has been flexible and reduce the size of the project based on staff and neighbor requests if you take a look at this 3 story pop out we've got a 3 story building the pop outs adopt to 2 stories and the front pulled in a little bit pardon i want to remind the city has made this a priority currently only 12 percent of the city is 12 percent older a single-family home does not rise to extraordinary situations >> is there any public comment?

okay any public comment on that item? >> commissioner antonini. >> i agree with the project sponsor i think it's been krafltd carefully and i think it's a going to be a good project and it's i would move to not take dr and include the project and on that motion to not take dr and approve the new construction. councilmember sharp. commissioner hillis. commissioner johnson. commissioner moore. xhoishd. commissioner president wu and so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on item 15. at 39804, 20th street this is an abbreviated discretionary review.

and good evening devon washington southwest team leader the proposed site is 25 feet wide and one hundred and 50 square feet between sanchez and church it is a one story if i may family dwelling located in the special use district the subject block has structures between one and 3 structures in size the proposal to construct a new second story to be set back 10 feet from the wall and a new roof-deck above the second story and includes a 3 and a half horizontal reduction with the

side edition at the garage level to accommodate the conversion of habitable the residential design team reviewed 2 following the admiring and found it consistent with the guidelines with a new roofline and proposes a 3 foot sent on the second level at the addition and determined this will provide adequate light and air to the neighbors those existing part will be uphill if the existing property they didn't agree that the dr suggesters be constructed against the side wall on the

property line. that concludes my presentation. and department is determined there's no extraordinary circumstances not take the discretionary review >> dr requester your team has 5 minutes. >> good evening commissioner president wu and commissioner. we have lived in our house on 20th street for almost 17 years before that we were close by church and seen the neighborhood go through many changes including the clean up of delores park and a lot of families moving into the neighborhood we welcome the idea of having another family into the neighborhood she should be able to build their property not

combrefr e trevor with others every time the wife come over to our house she talked about how they wouldn't be able to add into they're home because of the impact that are living in our home at the time. this was the basis for the 992 variance that was given which we are surprised and saddened its not being upheld i'd like to read that it stated no further horizontal a vertical subject of the building should be allowed unless authorized after the project sponsor or agent has had a new variance request and all the codes after the expansion

complies with the code is particularly with the neighborhood character and scale and does not cause significant loss of light or air may be determined that a new variance is not required our neighbor pointed out that the 189892 variance be upheld the new ordinance is reducing the structure if you walk to our house the majority of hour windows don't have the coverings and if they are they let in as much will the as possible the requester says the lighted well, is not the only light is this okay. if we lose our source of light and it doesn't mean they won't be directly effected of

the proposed light will benefit us when the light is over head if you look at a purify i brought you, see when their this is our home right here it's proposed to reach up to the top level our upper window so it will block all the windows at the uphill neighbors as well and our light currently from our house passes into our house she wanted to come but due do childcare wasn't able to come this project has had sixth impact we're speaking for ourself and asking that i will up headline hold the variants decision and revisit the impact it will have on our home

>> if you want to speak now is your time. >> good evening. this is a map showing the 1906 is actually, it was caught on fire and everything even e.r. else this is our house those houses were built in late 8 hundreds so just to give you fy when we saw the drawings the house what in fairly good condition 2 bedrooms very nice house and the way that the description writes out it's hard to image there's reduction over 3 hundred percent eagle lawmaker of the subject property and the amount of light that's our little dog loves to sit in

there, there are areas not shown are below the ground floor we have a property line and those are the only by bringing the high-rise we'll indefinitely loss the entire light? section i'll propose the expansion is only chances if so they had had garage. let the expansion takes places in the ground floor >> sir, your time is up. >> thanks. >> oak is there any public comment? supporting the dr requester. then project sponsor you have 5 minutes >> good evening commissioner president wu and commissioners i'm the architect for the project and my