failure i'm going to read a letter into the record and leave a copy for the staff secretary dear planning commissioners i'm writing to express my concerns about the building on pennsylvania proposed for the vacant lot other 355 pennsylvania avenue it is still too tall and big dwarf my house and didn't step down the hill benign e like e like the other buildings on the block this building should be in the

morning 3 stories any family reviewed the property plan and have the following comments we appreciate the efforts by planning staff and the builder to create a light well next to my bedroom light well, this will address the air concerns in my application introduction on the revised plan of a spiral staircase next week next to my property line is insulting it stair would have been replaced in the building additionally the proposed stairwell will need a firewall extending the wall 5 plus past my building wall i strongly obtain and ask this be changed additionally as come to my attention the calculation is based on 331 pen people real wall open the far north side that is excessive and extraordinary that was part of the existing building i'm asking you use to your rules to make the changes in the design the normal residential 45 rear yard design should be applied phenomenon the purposes of calculating circulating the rear yard for 333 pennsylvania avenue we don't wave our rights under the planning code with regards to the april 2014 i'm hopefully, the planning commission will do the right thing the daughter thank you. >> thank you. >> she asked me to if i have remaining time to ask mr. gonzales to continue thank you. >> sir can we do that?

oh, >> commission president in your rules whether they can or can't they're separate dr filers and their grant 5 minutes each they're not one team i think it is entirely up to your discretion. >> mr. gonzales after the project sponsor presents you'll have your two minutes be rebuttal. >> in all fairness shawn you have a minute and 30 seconds i paused it, it's awkward you are two spates teams if you want to use the last minute and a half.

>> thank you i think mr. gonzales has raised an important point regarding the 311 311 has been around a long time and the point of it is the plans that go out to the public represent a code compliant set of plans and the plans that went out to the public based on the rdt comments admit they don't comply under the section regarding garages in curb cut shown another issue the landscaping did not comply and so there are a number of issues the residential guidelines that are a matter of opinion in terms of their compliance but the scrip active

items clearly did in the comply therefore it's defective and those projects are renoticed when the problems are identified and unfortunately, your hands are tied for all of us thank you. the project sponsor your team has a 10 minute presentation. >> do you want to take public comment and i'm sorry i missed any public comment on that item? for members of the public supporting the dr requesters okay. i think so we're asking if there's anyone talking about the dr we're currently hearing

okay. seeing none project sponsor. >> my name is jess i'm with studio 12 architecture we're the architect for the project i apologize for this it is true we - when we first submitted the projects we had a different planner who is since moved on to another vision i guess is we remember n incorrectly advised on the garage issue we promoting changed i wanted to show graphically what we're talking about this is not just words the original project i don't know which side is right side up we presented this this shows the entrance is to the left and the

two garage doors and the 3 stories above that garage there you go site plan i'd like to respond to the issue of rear yard averaging we're urging the rear yard average the adjacent to the property are 7 foot set backs your property building is 68 feet 10 inches the neighboring buildings are 63 foot 4 a rear yard of 687 so the next neighbor over what we did was not use the 25 percent average to our rear yard we used the rearmost complying wall which is 75 feet 4 and

quarter we averaged that against the 68 plus at the property and arrived at our set backs we see the bay windows it falls within our set back averaging not projecting past that just as a graphic to show how the building is laid out in other words, to get the single car garage this is how the unit were laid out it has a half floor at the rear we excavate to get light and air and the living space and two stories of residential living above and that translates in our plan like this where we addressed the issues of the dr requester as

shown here initially we spoke with scott sanchez we were do i go papers on the driveway and planted areas but the plans i see front of the of you the 25 percent of landscape and walk up industry to the side that mirrors the dr applicant and the lot at the rear we're talking about a 3 by 5 foot wall we didn't respond to that initially and respond to the light well, in the center of the property the light well is shallow and deep we're on the north side of the dr requesters not casting shadows the rear yard was tussling a slot a set back and there's been a little bit added into the building that's

kind of falling into our property we didn't think of it as a light well but the slot we stair stepped up to the plate the building when planning came back and asked for the stairwell we created one the new plans we simpleminded are roughly the same building but the entrance goes up the stairs we were considering one above and blow we'll have a traditional san francisco layout with a single garage on the ground floor and a walk up to the two doors one to the left and one that takes the stair up i have additional paperwork if you need me to answer questions that concludes my presentation. thank you.

>> thank you i have one card for a member of the public in support michael . >> hi good afternoon my name is michael and can i show you the picture before i speak? okay. so a picture worth a thousand words >> excuse me. we're on a different case. >> wrong case. >> my name was mentioned. >> i called our name the address on the card is incorrect next item any other supporters of the dr.

>> i apologize it's my fault. >> seeing none, we'll have the rebuttal from the dr requesters. >> not when your representing the dr requester you're just representing the dr requester now your part of the dr requester but you'll get a 2 minute rebuttal. >> mr. gonzales a two minute rebuttal. >> i didn't catchall you said. >> you have two minutes. >> that's one the process we submitted the august one letter with the exhibits in your packet on august 5th bottom of my communication to mr. spears he said put it in

writing send me an e-mail we're going through emphasis junk box so it jurisdictional thing within the junk box he never saw it in the last two weeks those revised plans we got less than a months ago the 11 feed is in my exhibit j as i understand this commission can't approve plans that don't comply with the planning code the planning code is clear 10 feet after we obtained to it did they pit it in that's intentional in other words, for them to get their cars into the building based on they're new design they had to do because of our dr and never been looked at before our dr

the revised plans on the issue of views before those plans came in mr. burns and i had a conversation i have to question level four is east and the north away from my home his answers no windows on that wall that face south use the east side of the house the master deck or east and north only now on the revised plans a big window t is south into my master bedroom the deck is open to the window contrary to answers i got. >> thank you. sir, your time is up. >> mr. norman you have a two

minute rebuttal. >> i'd like to offer a point of clarification and i again want to reiterate the accomodation that was made regarding the light well is greatly appreciated because that's clearly something under the residential guidelines is a very common gesture it was stated that there were set backs in the original design that as jeff described a light well this document here liley and her dads property is right here this is the light well and it opens up favorite back this is the

proposed building next door there were no set backs to accommodate the light well at all under the original proposal and you can see that here building comes right up to where the light well is the light well continues back here opens up and willing i didn't has a bedroom right here that's consistent on all levels so i just wanted to clarify that point and regarding the scale of the building i think this graphic here which was provided by studio 12 i think illustrates it quite well, a four story building and all the buildings on this side of

the street and the buildings on that side of the street are 3 stories this building essential follows the building envelope allowed under section 2 61 so thank you. >> thank you project sponsor you have a two minute rebuttal. >> the light well initial as i mentioned we have responded to that with more than a 3 by 5 actually we were trying to get displaying along that it is a little bit incorrect to show it going all the way you down our building is lower than they're

the hill slopes in the south we're four and a half feet lower than the building to the right when we did the mapping of our building we asked the building inspection to go in while it's true those building go are 3 stories our building is pushed into the ground no right to maintain the single-family mapping on each side. >> okay with that, the public hearing portion is closed commissioner antonini. >> first to staff any there were comments about noticing and the staff report says the project has not been modified in a way to require the 311 notice

you're happy with the noticing. >> correct if the building were to exist and add a front or rear stair that is not subject to notification so the project has not expanded in volume and all the editions and restrictions it included a light well and the result they had access to their rear yard via the stare at the rear it is not subject to 311 notification we feel that the project it has been substantially quality for notification additional the other question while you're up the upper floor usually we set that back a little bit typically i know it's compliant with the height allowed but we have kind of a slant on it rather than a

set back and i'm not sure why we're not asking for a set back open the upper floor. >> i can allow the architect or project applicant to speak it that we've reviewed to the habitable space under and shading that kind of slanting of the roof you see it's similar to property south that has it's two stories over garage, however, the slanted roof it is similar in massing to the properties to the south they have a odometerer at the front whereas the project has a pop out deck space. >> thank you that answers most of my questions i think they've almost all the things that were problems seemed to have been met by the accumulations of the project sponsor has done so my

only comment would be ass as far as the appearance if the front the windows seem rather large i'd rather seen it's not a wayne's coding but part of the windows not floor to ceiling i thought that would have fit better with the architecture style the styles vary but they have 2, 3, 4 common not huge windows in the front other than that, i don't feel other things in the project needs to be modified. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to ask about the the comments about the drawing sets perhaps mr. spears can answer that the driveway is incorrectly dimensioned. >> as i reviewed the project previous it was understood it

was an 8 foot curb but it was under review for the changes discussed when i saw the curb cut dimension was 8 feet i didn't look into that further just looking at the rdt by the residential design team our zoning administrators has the dimensions for a maximum curb cut we request it is revised if so dimension is wrong we'll make sure the complies with that part of the code. >> the other question. >> excuse me. to clarify that the sheet what with the side kathleen plan shows the 10 feet

curb cut. >> the question is about bird safe buildings by building under 40 feet don't fall into the bird save under the 50 foot square feet rule i'm wondering have i gone under the circulations indeed with within the plans. >> i'll let the architect speak but i was given materials that it was bird safe glass not visible to humans but bidders in the 24 inch panels but the first class is being treated. >> does the rules speak about bird safe glass as an alternatives i'm not familiar with that. >> there's alternatives like treatments or spreading to the glass that exceeds a requirement

and we feel it is code compliant. >> in the conditions that is specifically nos i'll suggest this is an interpretation thing if we don't have the calculations the conditions of approval needs that it has a lot of glass i don't mind it but it is a little bit excessive on the south facing wall because are normally on the building lot a lot of that width and depth we mostly have the windows and office in this block phase i'm kind of questioning that. >> that's understood i think in in this case you can take a motion to exclude dr. >> how the people reflect there is a little bit too much glazing

on the south side overlooking baefg a back looking at the joint property i believe the spiral staircase is something that requires a dbi and fire department review because it is not quite clear about the reality of that stair it looks like it is a closed stair the way it is rendering out you're nodding you 0 you know the rules and i know under is a rule of fire separation, etc. i'm not as knowledgeable you can come up. >> the one hour rule we originally proposed the upper unit got rear yard access by walking onto the yard we put the light well and moved the entry

over we needed another stare at the request of planning we put in a stair that violated the 68 foot rule so we changed it to a spiral at the time i did a one hour rated wall on the spiral two things the owner wants the stairs moved inside so we'll move it inside and second the planning asked i send a note confirming should this stair need a one hour additional wall that would be a variance of the requirement so i sent the note back to the planning department stating i'm in agreement florida requires a one hour wall we'll apply for a variance my belief the stair is going to be removed inside of the house. >> there's a preference to have the stairs inside i think we

should ask for that the issue of the stair and the privacy issue as to whether or not the commission wanted to entertain south facing walls and the privacy that's a enough of a modification to take dr asked the stairs be moved in and the bird safe glass because the amount of glass is what the applicant offers and this is a being implemented. >> this is a code requirement you can reference the code or - >> the zoning administrator reminds the commission that when a requirement is codified titdz it's unnecessary to make a and a it a requirement. >> the fluctuation has a importantly riggs the birds can see we cannot. >> in whatever way it is done i

appreciate our interpreting the scoping administrator i want to note it the 45 of the height of the building normally you have to submit a calculation since we don't have it i want to make sure we get it. >> is that a motion. >> yeah. that was a motion in sort yes. >> second. >> okay. before we vote we should repeat motion. >> the architect i have a question on the windows if i come up first of all, the south facing window what is the height of that ceda facing window. >> above grade. >> well, not above grade from the top of the windows to the bottom of the window approximately. >> approximately 3 feet. >> it's got to be more than 3

feet in height it looks at pretty huge. >> yes four and a half feet. >> it's only - and 5 foot back from the property line. >> yeah. the one that commissioner moore was talking about the facing south one. >> this window right here came about when we introduced this one. >> there's a large view of on the second panel the view from the front and the view with the decks there's a huge window there. >> oh. >> maybe that's east. >> that is east i think you're talking - oh. >> yeah. that's the one how tall is that.

>> that window is 413 feet tall and how about the windows in the front. >> the taught itself one is 11. >> the middle one look about the same size well, the top one yeah. those two well, i would ask if the commissioner moore would be interested in accepting an amendment where you take 3 feet off the bottom of all three of those windows and put your siding on there instead. >> i'm sure i'm not here to design the architecture i only comment i believe the building is fine there's no 3 feet but which i'll reduce the windows i made comments about something that is