there is an open courtyard/roof deck which i do not believe adequately mitigates exposure to air pollutants but construction alternatives do mitigate air pollution. i would like to see some sort of compare tive analysis of quality control measures of all three project alternatives. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. >> commissioner antony? >> of course we have a partial preservation preservation alternative and certainly that is important to have in ir and there is worthy of discussion as we move forward with approved of the project because nearby the street project did a preservation and an addition to the

preservation certainly it makes for adequate and ir. so i'm happy to see those in there. >> no further comments? okay. thank you commissioners. moving to item 9. 115 telegraph hill also known as 353 fill bert street for conditional use authorization. they continued this matter to september 11th, however you are not part of that commission at that time. in order to participate in this hearing today you must acknowledge that you have reviewed the video and prepared to consider this system in >> i did and i am. >> thank you. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners and welcome commissioner

richards. director of planning. the project for request for conditional use operation for density and parking to allow the construction of a new three 3-unit building with four parking spaces at 115 telegraph boulevard telegraph hill north beach residential special use district. the approximately 75 hundred square 00-square foot lot contains a section of the corner of the rear lot but has been vacate for 17 years. the site is located between montgomery street and telegraph hill neighborhood. as the commission second mentioned this project was heard on july 17th, following public testimony. the commission asked the project sponsors to make revisions time. the primary revisions sought by the commission of the site building so the units read as

detached structures. articulation and detailing along the sidewall of the unit 3, a reduction size of the building pent houses. the commission already suggested the plan be -- since it will be renovated to its 395 variance form. the project sponsor has made several changes to this sponsor which they will go into more detail following my presentation. but in short. the respondent to commission -- and providing a five 5-foot space between unit three to allow for larger corridor. they have added windows and a receded desk to provide

articulation and detailing of that facade. they have reduced the site of the penitentiary -- pent houses and path lighting on the front side of the site to improve the experience walking up the steps and further 6 inches, has provided additional information about the construction management plan and shown a detailed fire lane will be kept clear during the construction to the satisfaction of the fire department. lastly the sponsors provided information where this project will return to its variance form. the project is expected to be improved and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. the department recommends you approve this with conditions. thank you.

>> project sponsor? >> good afternoon commissioners. i want to thank you for all of your time. i'm very excited about the design we are presenting. we started working on this project three 3 years ago and it's transformed and evolved largely from the feedback from the neighbors i met over the years. i truly believe what we have today is a much better project than what we started with and proud to be presenting it. i want to talk about the support nor project. 37 letters. the majority of supporters express strong opinions on many aspects of the project

to parking, to view corridors and beautification of the steps. incorporating 47 different opinions plus the comments of the planning department as well as taking the consideration of the opinions of the opposition has been quite a challenge but it's definitely made for a better project. before lewis prz the design, i want to show you what was put into it. what we heard from you and from my perspective as a project sponsor. across the board everyone recognized telegraph hill as an iconic lotion. -- location. the views that the lot should be put up that cascade down the hill and each view should be distinguished and read more as a single family home than apartments. we have a wider setback to achieve this. we've also heard that views

are important. both from telegraph and the steps. we have a very nice view corridor viewable from the blvd and the stairs including a full view of the trans-america building. this is what no other property on our street provides. we have lost space since the last hearing but feel the project is better for it. lastly parking, most who live nearby are asked that we include parking. without that they will use the tour to drop off groceries and causing congestion. there are many projects close to the muni bart and work well with no parking. that is not the case here. as you can see from the graphic of the block, the

overwhelming majority of parking are in the vicinity. i understand that parking is a sensitive issue that must be addressed and viewed with careful consideration. we have spent considerable time to the garage design to maximize effectiveness. parking is simply too risky at this location. i have bought this project that i want emphasized. that's part of the reason why the property sat vacant for 20 years and in all agreement that it is in the best interest of the city and neighborhood to develop it. the property tax from this project will be at least $200,000 per year which is over $4 million in the 20 -year stand and the neighborhood gets beautified in the process. the degree of support we have is a real testament to that. with that i thank you for

your consideration and i will hand it to my architect louis butler. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners, my name is louis butler formula retail -- for 115 telegraph hill. i would like to start with the spacing between the buildings. on the screen in sfront of you you see a graphic going from left to right, east to west there is over three 3 feet between the neighboring building to the easton our first building, another three 3 feet between 1 and 2 and 2 and 3 and five 5 feet between the west wall. that is a significant change from what you saw a month ago. in addition there is over three feet 3 feet on the

neighbor side and we have 8 or inch corridor on that siechltd it was our feeling to provide spaces between all the buildings. the pedestrian experience up the steps is very much about this experience as seeing the light from the south coming between the buildings. the previous proposal you saw this was not real spaces, some of them were setback from the buildings. these are actual real spaces. moving onto the perspectives. you will see the top left on the board's perspective southwest from telegraph hill. we used many more materials from the in fill, we are using different kind of wood on the base, combinations of oak, walnut, also some of the details have a did -- dull metal finish to differentiate

from one another. it's a site. but we want these buildings to appear as a family and also as individual buildings, i think the best example at that time painted ladies they are a group of six. i like that model and that is model that we pursued within the modern vocabulary with this project. the view on the right hand side is shown in that lower left perspective. this turns out, there is a lot of different views. this right hand view turns out to be an important one on the west side of the building. it's also enhanced by setting back the west building so we can finish that side and added a substantial december -- deck on the southwest corn and allows more sky to appear from that side. on the south side of the building, although this

wasn't talked about as much a month ago we focused on breaking up the south side so the verticality was less evident and the base of the buildings really tie into garden and the tops of the buildings are differentiated at a two 2 story scale. you can see in that rendering that second row top. the base of the building is 40 percent less glass and about the landscaping and should fill with the yard open space and the top you will see from the city generally. i feel like it's a big improvement than the vertical we presented last time. you can see in the second column lowest graphic, the spacing between the buildings compared to what we had before. i think you have all seen this graphic before. moving on to the third column, these are the improvements to the fill bert street steps.

i hope it's obvious that the lower photograph is what the steps look like now and the upper photograph is what they will look like when it's done. we are looking forward to planting where there is none on the left hand side and reif furbishing the steps and setting back and adding lighting on the south side and making it an experience on those systems that's a charming experience. and gardens on the hill. it's not that experience at this point. if you look at the next set of boards, you will see again the lower photograph, that's the view corridor at the pedestrian level that exist between our site and the west most building. the prospective above is what we propose. i think the effect of that

open is evident both on that upper right graphic and on the lower left board graphic. that is not an insignificant amount of space opening up. this is one on one really see's and we really focused on that area. many of the conversations we had are focused around driveway safety and we have taken the aspect of the project very seriously. as you know this project uses a car elevator. we demonstrated a cone toxicology out -- coming out of the vat elevator forward

gives us the ability to see pedestrians better. this is not a dicey driveway situation and this is going to be very effective. we have a detailed construction management plan. >> commissioners, we did receive a request and granted a 10 -minute block to opposition. i would like to remind those that the intent of the 10 -minute block is to reduce the amount of speakers and you should courage the number of you're group that you are speaking on their behalf. >> thank you very much for allowing us to speak. commissioners, good afternoon, i'm dan hayes. this revised plan before you today, when it comes to reducing building scale and massing, preserving significant public views and minimizing construction

impacts, this revised plan misses the mark. the three new units are still larger than any other unit within 300 feet of the site and over 4,000 square foot each and they are larger than the average unit size of 25 hundred square 00-square foot. excavation is still so massive that it will require more than a thousand trips disrupting traffic for months maybe longer. even after thd has sought to work with this developer for a period of years there has been no outreach to the thd board since the last hearing. in light of that and to help find more appropriate alternatives for this site we have arranged appropriations by thdd and planning and urban design firm.

on behalf of thd i would like to ask kevin dylan to come here and give you a presentation. >> good afternoon. i am quick ly going through a series of diagrams and hopefully our more in spirit of the general plan objectives and policies specifically as they relate to telegraph hill and this project concerning preserving the public view corridors and unique character of telegraph hill, the step development of the hillside and the neighborhood and scale of the streets and housing and of course the dramatic views and hopefully show some ideas about options that could reduce the excavation and subsequent -- consequently

the construction schedule and densities which includes more than three 3 units and alternates to parking as well. with that this first option is three 3 units with the east side of the lot has a 18 1/2 view corridor, in other words aggregated the idea of several small view corridors and put them at top of the steps where we felt there was a much stronger connection to the neighborhood for the project itself it does a lot of really nice things as well. this is what we are calling our preferred scheme. it has the three units 3 units on the steps, there is a massing profile on the steps there in compared to the

proposed project. again, these are massing diagrams, not fully in the architectural plan. this one has a 2 stories steps down the hillside on the steps in both directions, entries off the steps and then from the rear stepping down again like most of the topography and larger units in telegraph hill to the west and to the south as well in mass. and then there is the view at the top of the fill bert step through the view corridor on the proposed project on 111 telegraph. another idea with parking part of the wider view corridor to the turn radius of a car if parking had to be done, it

would be nice to get the parking garage off the stairs and would be safer and better to the residents as well as getting maximum use anden enjoyment out of the view corridor. this is a three 3-unit and one below and this is a profile on the fill bert steps. a massive diagram on the two 2 units basically two and three stories 3 stories with a parking level basically one 1/2 levels down below those two 2 units. not a deep excavation to accommodate a three 3-car parking garage. the rear view stepping down the hill towards the south and the west again and that can certainly be done without parking as well and space be given to these units.

again, a slightly wider view on the corridor to the top of the steps. another scheme, 6 units, 1700 square -square foot each. no parking, same view cord or at the top of the steps, three stories 3 stories on the steps as well. there is the massing view from the step and to reduce the height on the steps, the top could be pushed back as well and a massing view from the rear stepping down the hill to the west and to the south and again pretty much the same view at the top of the step. then finally a four 4-unit idea of basically same layout very similar to the first one showed with the three 3 units facing the steps and a fourth

tucked behind below and again probably three 3 story each stepping down the steps and more massing diagram with a third option and the rear stepping down breaking up the mass towards the west and tles -- there is the view at the top of the fill bert step. there is a summary of dan that has the square footage total. thank you very much. >> good afternoon. i'm mary lip yan of the planning committee. because this is flawed, this matter must be continued.

the project advocate that it would be revert to its original condition. the hearing was noticed for four 4 units but should have been noticed for 5. the two 2 units were emerged and enlarged after the variance expired. if the project applicant wish is to return the cottage to its original configuration, they will still need a variance because the exterior stair to the upper unit was demolished and into ed to put it back. it's brings the total unit to five instead of four. therefore the conditional use notification was insufficient. this matter must be continued. thank you. >> okay. opening for public comment?

mary ross, whitney. >> hello commissioners. i'm the house right on the other side of the cottage. i'm not evening -- even going to talk about aesthetics. i grew up in a land and when they were making major the fact that there is water will change. all the property owners near

this project are equally affected. we are going to have water issues, construction vibration that is going to cause properties to crack. i think it will move in an earthquake. what we find mind boggling is that there was no proper geotechnical which went down 5 feet as well as an environmental impact report. if i wanted a massive house i would have moved somewhere else. i don't know why it has to endangers the neighbors below. if you can guarantee me there is nothing going to happen, i would be happy. i say that every, he says he has local support. every

single neighbor i have talked to are completely worried about their properties. there is three properties up for sale now partially they want to get out before this project goes forward. also by improvements, there is two issues that do not help us there. one is i was just recently burglarized by a burglar accessing that property and with the noise level down in that corridor hurts us rather than help us. the second is that then he pulls back and he's allowed to have windows on that side. i'm not against windows but he's going to be looking at all our underer bellies and any privacy we have, goes away with that. that doesn't help us, the improvement there. thank you very much.

>> thank you. next speaker. >> hi. i live at 1454 kearney street, eric is my neighbor, the back yards are a joined. i'm not opposed to development on this site in anyway. i think it would be great if the vacant lot went away but i think this project is inappropriate and in respect to earth moving is my biggest concern. the big excavation to allow for the parking elevator, they are talking about going down to more than 30 feet at the top of the fill bert steps, you are going to have a 350 -foot sheer wall and the only access is to telegraph

boulevard. if they don't see what is the ground structure there, to me appears very risky and i'm concerned about earth moving during vibration and sliding down towards our property. the offset or the separation between the west side of the building to allow a viewing angle is going to cause issues. the neighbor has an open backyard and if they are able to access that, they are going to be able to get into the the backyard where police and other is surveillance cannot be there unless we put in cameras. seeing the plans from the dwellers, any option seems like a better option and return investment for the developer.

thank you. >> hello, my name is nan roth. my husband and i own two adjoining properties. i have written to you about the noise and dust. we are in our 80s and thoroughly traumatized. i have to mention the fact that our house is earthquake retrofitted. we have a concrete foundation. bolted to the foundation yet our house is moving down the hill. a sample with the issues you have with the soil conditions here. it's terrible to have water percolating through your basement floor. that's what happens when the water shifts around the rocks in this particular area. there is something down there the water can't get passed and it backs up into our cellar. i would also to reinforce the

transit issue. you can't believe the problems wei -- we've had. we built a large fence as high and we actually watch people jump over the fence. it is very very high and we still put the bars close enough but somehow they do, it's become a big problem. while we are happy to see that the latest plans are to restore the cottages to the original plan. they required this action in the event the cottage was demolished. the structure does not remain. it deities from deviates from the original plan. where as the placement on both of the original structure and the plans approved for the variance do not compromise.