facing facade looking at towards the freeway is a tenth of a mile-long i have a concern that particular facade didn't have a civic diverse enough expression he while we're experiencing it on the freeway driving i want it to be the same architecture i want to know there's a residential building on the other side that has expression there's a civic side i don't see here i want to ask to make it more of a two sided building i believe that freeway architecture unfortunately, we have 2 freeway architecture by needs to have a user friendly side i understand the rooms that are facing it you have a are corridor and access to boormdz

to get the but for but i want to see more variety on the ocean side otherwise you have my one hundred percent support to move forward. >> commissioner oh, sorry. >> is it possible to make a quick response. >> go ahead. >> i might put an image up there's an i am in the packet we give this a lot of thought, of course, that piece ties together the building and the building forms an acoustic buffer to the neighborhood but it is where the circulation is on the building what we have come up with at this point though definitely a piece of earth that wraps around creating a nice eloquent course element as you come down the

freeway so the commissioners we're proposing as you say long commissioner a series of sculpted pieces they breakdown this great color of materials and those openings between them you get light into that calibration the south light and in the evening we've litter that we have to keep in mind that facade is on 25 feet total in terms of what sticks up the freeway there's a lot of vegetation and there's a significant amount of trees but we thought of 43 it in terms of something that is in motion and we're concerned about the impact of lights and on the folks up the hill looking down from potrero hill the only place from

potrero hill is the residents we couldn't find a view i appreciate the comment but we thought of it as something you view in motion and something pleasant to be in and have a presence in the evening and something also in some sense has kind of what is the right word industrial or whatever quality so that's our reason. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i'm in port of the project but avalon is working with the developer on their project on indiana my main question and brought this up it is next to 280 of it gets knocked down we're looking at this building

seeing the highway section i appreciate the ventilation facility i understand that the radioactively core spaces are generally not considered an exposure zone for people with forgetting the wording right now and the receptors. >> yes. federally speaking you're not sitting out there all day long but you know on of a person might live they're having an open courtyard and building literally on the other side of the building from 280 doesn't seem comfortable socially or also from a health prospective i'd like to know who asked about

the sequa i'd like someone 40 from avalon or potentially the architect to comment on the only courtyards and whether they cancer other ways of appealing it with the ventilation or something to mitigate what i'm talking about. >> before i we are that we take the opportunity to visit where the bay bridge comedy, get you a tour they have a rooftop it is actually where the rooftop we toured the rooftop it was a sunny day and you couldn't hear the freeway from a shielding standpoint there is a way to perhaps comment more but it was pretty amazing to be on the roof and the freeway you couldn't sense the impact.

>> i actually was supportive because of the building right next to the bay bridge i've not noticed that personally i was thinking about the ventilation i know what you're talking about that is more appealing and the seating is away from the highway and you're not breathing in the highway air. >> and so i want to let the arithmetic talk about that one for the record we're going to be filtering so the roof decks you're asking about again i'll let the designers talk about it i will continue to look at the dimensions between the roof deck

we can do a lot of things with the design and as a potential resident as commissioner moore was interested in moving in if commissioner moore moves in we'll be happy the choice to have a roof deck it feels different not being able to offer that amenity but there's a lot of things the park is across the street and courtyards that people will be free to use rather than depraif of another amenity the street side nice south facing we think those will be well-used and appreciated amenity and you know we can do what we do given the site - >> before the architect comes up i think you've answered my

question the roof deck or no one for building b or c i'll say keep it it adds to the kraks of the building and where people are and the community this and the block i would say that i start noticing that people are not using it going back to my comments put a fan up there or something to ohmmeter those responses. >> i appreciate the comments that is a good comment and suggestion to think about we're as far away the rooftop are 50 feet away from the roof deck it is about a variety of open space with the public and private envelope i think it is tough to do much more in particular from

the freeway so most of it will fall closer to the freeway we've done what we can in terms of placing those roof decks. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'm going to move if i can an intent to adapt the sequa findings. >> the motion to intent to approve would be better with a coupled with a meeting in january. >> there's a motion to intent to approve the authorization and also my motion to continue to continuance to january 8th, 2015. >> second and commissioner richards. >> i think you pretty much hit a home run i like the 3 architects i wish scott wiener we had larger projects that had

this confluence of design i like the amenities the courtyards are setting a standard what i look for in large projects in the future this is a wow. standard i like urging the local firms for hire i have a question on the rental affordability i know when we have affordability maybe director ram or staff sir, you, help refresh my memory. >> they've agreed to pay the affordable housing fee if on site they'll have to have a hawkins agreement in place as well as the affordable housing agreement and the only option on site the hallway sins e kins agreement the city grants them exceptional zoning congressman's or amenities in zoning because

of court rulings at the state level we certainly can't require that but they have the restrictions in providing on site unless exceptional amenity the city is providing for them thank you. >> commissioner hillis. >> well, i would add i've worked open parcel c without you dividing it up it's been interesting drooefg by and seeing it go up i think i did a better job that one look good also but thank you - >> we have the scaffolding coming down and owens look more distinct than did other one change the facade and make it look different without it backing b.c. being a different

building you go the next step its a project when we do larger projects thank you to the d dog patch. >> i want the department to hold is an additional discussion on the western facade i'm not talking about the chronicle - when you see it ten times we can add a tweak of something else i'll deeply appreciate that the building separation you're doing with caution is not particularly deep so there is still the feeling when you drive it is just one building think about it

one more time and expand the conversation i'm not quite sure we have all the makers the motion. >> yes. i'll accept that a suggestion to work with staff on. >> is that amenable. >> thank you, commissioners. >> you want to pasture make sure does the gentleman have questions. >> i think i understand work on refinancing the highway facade that articulates the 3 distinct mass and that could be subtle it can be not in coloring i leave that up to and discretionary and with conditions that the project sponsor continue working with staff on the design for it the

freeway side continuing to january 8th commissioner antonini arrest commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner fong and commissioner president wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and place you on our discretion. >> we'll take a real quick 5 minute break. >> december 18, 2014, i would of the public and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. commissioners we left off in our discretionary review calendar item 14 at is that stein street under the discretionary review.

>> again and again good evening i've david lindsey of the department staff this is a discretionary review of a building permit application that proposed a two-story in addition 2 1/2 story over garage family house the third story and the addition the project will add approximately, six hundred and 60 feet of space to the house located mid block on steiner street between back to the drawing board in the pacific heights the subject block faces slops laterally north and south the project compiles with the planning code and consistent with the guidelines and the notification neighborhood

notification was initialed on september of 22 the request for discretionary review was submitted by the owner and resident on sterner streetcar north of the subject property the department received four letters of opposition if to the project 3 from vallejo street and one prove or disprove on steiner street since the staff analysis was distributed one letter from a neighbor in addition to the letter of support from the neighbor in the 24 hundred street of vallejo street the dr requesters concerns are the project creates

a shadow and impacts on the property and not respectful of typography and didn't respect the projects floor deck exceeds his and incapable with the middle block pattern of this block and following the discretionary review the project was reviewed by the residential design team it was a reasonable expansion that sets up to the light of dr requesters property are reasonable and that project privacy is minimal the project is not creating extraordinarily circumstances and approve the project as proposed. >> dr requester our team has 5

minutes. >> jose as may we have the screen on and leave it on for the duration of 5 minutes. >> good evening commissioner president wu and members of the commission i'm joe butler an architect since march our team has their family room are set back from the common property line downhill and to the north of the sponsor the 311 plans property to extend a green house edition on the property line i advised them to read the

residential guidelines he quote to me the residential guidelines address the common guidelines of residential design all permits must imply with the residential design guidelines and they having must comply with the principle one principle says place the this on the site to respond to the topographic i didn't those quotations suggested to him that the microphone might negotiate an young and old model we presented our they have in issue with the design in spite of wavrn the sponsors the lot exceeding 20 percent that might require additional environmental review our 3-d model graefg utilizes

the center image of the forms of envelopes the existing at the top and the permit application at the bottom and our compromise in the middle it casts shadows into the cigarette butt as you can see from our exits the envelope is the same square feet and accomplishes the same program as their preapplication plan on loots that looerl step down the hill it should minimize the impact open the downhill principle additional depth against a gasping and have first floor wall not over on the property line looked the first and second floor of the set back understanding windows at our first meeting in june the

sponsors architects prepared a recession that moved the rear edition to the second floor it was a pro tem start it showdown flexibility before i left i ask would we meet again and in july the 3 envelope backing became larger we reached out to the height is association and presented our envelope our envelope flipped the same size first floor and employed a bay window reducing the feet beyond the blue like that the rear walls form a nearly western edge to the middle block open space planning staff use this

blue line and evaluates the code radiation the pink area the second story is on the line but the first floor becomes the first addition break admittedly within the envelope are typically approved because in their no different than a 10 foot fence but it excelling exceeds the lateral sleep the zero lot line placement to my clients yard sponsors brief proposes a return to the envelope it is described as a generous offer to the neighbor finally both sides agree this commission should take discretionary review why? because tyler a offer has not been filed without the dr their

general reiterate goes away when changes would make the best upper design we urge you to take dr and respectfully suggest our compromise envelope be adapted as the site envelope i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you opening for public comment in support of dr (calling names). >> hi, i'm karin and i live two doors from the sponsor house on the downside the - on the design doors down from the sponsor i have a problem with my eye and light i highly be object

to the property plan the sponsors plan to build his basement is on the downhill it's my affordable units they're not going to have set backs if this is approved i'm afraid it is going to set a precedent on a direct impact on my property then 2728 steiner if he wanted to sell his house the new owner can initiate a project that will have a devastation on any life therefore i respectfully request you do not approve that project as simpleminded. >> my son is an architect based

on what we told me and according the san francisco guidelines one has to respect the typography of the site and the surrounding areas it's apparent if the project sponsors precede with the construction that's being as being proposed their violating the san francisco design guidelines best way for sponsor to proceed with the addition to build the addition on the other side of the property on the uphill i've lived with may late husband for 28 years this is a truly neighborly friendly place we have quarterly parties and discussing issues all the neighbors know each other and

respect one another the last thing we want to see is tension with the neighbors as much is a as is neighbor i don't wish to get involved with those kinds of issues but the san francisco residential guidelines should prevail. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment. >> hello, i'm isabel i'm a high school junior and the daughter of the folks all i want to say those neighbors they moved in we were welcoming to them and want them to enjoy their house and the expansion all we are asking to move it over to minimize the impact it has on the neighbors that's it the only reason so we can keep as karina said before

keep the relationship we had before that's my one request thank you. >> is there any additional public comment seeing h seeing none, project sponsor your team has 5 minutes. >> hello, i'm david i'm here on behavior on behalf of brian who are the project sponsors and want to point out that the dr requester has not notified that i extraordinarily facts and circumstances after 5 meetings with the neighbors some compromises were made changes to the project to try to accommodate some of the concerns but some were not able to be and the moving the project to the

other side was considered but the problem is that on the folks property 3 and a half years ago they had to do a considerable seismic foundation upgrade to the side on the north where this work is being proposed not such a foundation on the seismic foundation it will cost a considerable amount of money we're looking at other things this is a map in our package you'll note that the project sponsors property is the only one that is not extend as far as properties on the other side the dr requester extended to the south further and the other neighbor further down is extended fallout one the

modification was to set back the second floor 2 and a half feet to be in line with the just a minute dr requesters we've stepped back 2 feet you all note the sleep between broadway it is incredibly steep those are huge and you'll see the vegetation it creates shadow than will be coming from the folks home i should also point out that this the study it was done and presented by itself dr requester a truly hypothetical and only considers two buildings it if consider those normal circumstances it didn't consider

the context of the building it on considers two buildings adjacent to each other all the contextual there is only the shadow will be minimal at best i which the studio point out there are other questions to be made there were things going to be added that might have been intruding those have been removed the designer reviewed this and if you would, found it eligible to deny the dr but we've made those improvements i want ask the gentleman to speak for himself. >> thank you commissioners thank you for the opportunity to discuss this this is request i'm