next year with many other departments like rec and park not only the park portion of the plaza but all the surrounding streets as well those can be incorporated. >> can we not at that particular time this. >> commissioner hyland my recommendation or again ission could make a finding in the future as part of the master plan this issue be considered and if there's an option that minimize or reduce the number of traffic signals that that be considered at the time of the master plan. >> yeah. yeah. >> okay. are we voting on this. >> do we need a motion. >> right. >> i know i spelled it out. >> i move the staff represents including the amendments that

you suggested which was to add 3 we keep the existing flashing signals and add one in the future. >> and number one to paint. >> and the condition of the paint right. >> did he hear a second. >> second. >> thank you commissioner johns. >> commissioners we have a we have a motion and a second to adapt the recommendation proposed by staff as amended to include in recommended condition number one that the poles be painted to match existing poles and that the light be in concert with the existing lights of red including a finding to further study bulbouts to be considered as part of the master plan.

>> commissioner hyland commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman commissioner wolfram and president hasz so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on item 12 for case no. at 3751 to 53 this is a certificate of appropriateness. >> good afternoon rich from the department staff this is a certificate of appropriateness which is a contributing resource to the liability willful i hill landmark district it conservative a a 3 car garage and basement level and principle facade of the removal of aluminum windows on the third floor and new fixed windows to match the historic windows and construction of a pair of

windows on the east and west facade and rear yard reorganization to provide exposure and removal of the two-story rear radiation and 3 story edition to the roof deck for a two family residents of 2423 hundred square feet to 23 thousand square feet today the department received 3 letters in support and 3 in opposition most of the opposition have commented on the light and air concerns as well as ottawa other one expressed the project xashth with the lark district included in the copies are additional public corresponds since the

copies of the environmental impact report and recommend 3r50u68 with companies to insure that the property work is under prior to approval the project sponsor shall provide samples to insure the incapability and those material samples shall demonstrate the texture and paint they should be consistent with the overlay character and two prior to the permit the project sponsor shall provide an assessment 9 windows with the existing windows and shall provide detailed information about the material and the grassably and there 3 prior to approval the project sponsor shall salvage and use the

retaining wall bricks since portions the existing brick arranging wall the project sponsor shall use the bricks to the extent feasible by the preservation staff the project sponsor is present as has prepared a short public works that concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you.

>> good afternoon project architect with the design build going to talk about two items first contacts for the project scope and goals of project sponsor for the project then talk about the facade and the addition we've prepared information about the shoring drainage and other issues if there's question there's site and context so we are on 20th street between gerrero and deploring that is our project site a yellow house

as you can see a large street tree that obscures our elevation this is one of the ways to see the facade through the trees pr it thou up the hill on 20th looking down the street and this is obviously part of the facade and then not sure what's going on here i'll try this to lower the resolution so first, the scope of the project a new garage and

driveway a new story between the new garage and the existing first floor of the house on the hill this is living says that a 3 story rear addition and 5gd dormer windows and it is a large project it is a big project as simple we identified 3 key goals before we began the design the first to respect the liability hills district this is concealed below grade it is not easily visible to the street and two respecting the original structure this structure is a contribution of authentic evidence of that way to build it not a unique daily as such our 2k3w50id principle for the new

elements and fabulous 3 respecting our western neighbors cigarette butting to have the air for their existing property windows and for our eastern neighbor the masking of our edition pushing it away from the central courtyard for the visible facade this is the existing frant front facade as proposed a list of changes starting at the top replacing a window that is more compatible with the existing structure you can see the rear yard edition you can see our in set windows in the doorway dormer and

obviously the garage this is a disable roof and the proposed condition of what we're calling the minnie windows this is the traditional gable windows this is proposed and from this prospective this is the only visible changes replacing the windows and the rear garage so elevation it accosting the light and proposed very light there pr rear edition starting with a block plan our subject property is the light gray and pretty much the small it footprint on the street here's a view from our rear yard back towards the facade the western neighbors to the left and the eastern to the right looking back the other way

started our yard this is an existing site plan how we arrived at the masking and taking the average of our two nightclubs rear facade this is establishing our envelope for our 3 story edition to our rear yard line those are the dimensions and also a two-story pop out back 12 feet and also 5 feet from either property line this essentially sets up 9 curve letter so this will give us the site plan so going if right to left our existing 3 story hours and new edition and now story pop out the challenge is that this envelope will have you us up against the neighbors on the property line it it should be 1eb9 to preserve the light and

air to the neighbors and the existing number one compliant structure to the eastern neighbors lot and obeying the letter of the law it is pinched there legal access to this block we were proposing to square feet that over to the western neighbor to max miss the light and air available so there's the prospective from our rear yard to the existing structure and the proposal so those restraining order elevations that are hard to see and the additional inform i can through go through if anyone was questions on the shoring. >> thank you, commissioners

questions? comments >> i have a question in the packet it said that this project will require a variance from the planning commission is there a way to describe that? >> rich department staff i didn't the project requires a rear yard variance since the project is shifting that mass explained they there center to get a variance from the zoning administrator for the rear yard so it is too far back into the rear yard. >> i'm sorry. >> the edition is too far back into the rear yard. >> it self-follow basically, what the code allows to the planning code dimension are fairly strict beyond the rear yard property line so behind the

3 story edition it shows what it's allowed beyond the 0 point and in this case it didn't meet the dimension and okay. thank you. >> architect graphically i can explain the variants. >> you see the drawings okay so this 0 here we go here is the two-story pop out into the rear yard that is technically allowed by the planning code but required to be set back 5 feet from each property line so you're seeing the pop out it's 2 stories and set back 5 feet from the west and the east property lines the issue that's triggering the variance is we would like to set

that pop out up against our western neighbors larger structures to provide for light and air for our neighbors to the east 23 we were to proceed with the letter of the law planning code planning code it will pinch the connection of the mid courtyard between the mid structure on the eastern part. >> thank you that's helpful. >> commissioner hyland. >> i have a question about the excavation i assume this will be the full environmental impact report or what about the architectural review i believe that's in our purview. >> it's exempt huh? we're digging pretty deep more than 10 photo. >> rich from the staff we will look at thees evacuates issues

and what architectural potential as well so the document that was provided to you is the summary of environmental review conducted by the environmental review staff they'll have screened the proposals by two of our step archeologists. >> oh, sir while you - what's the standard set back minimum? for - >> for any kind of horizon what do we normally do is it 10 or or 15 as tim frye department staff you mean the verizon edition it varies within 9 district but as commissioner pearlman mentioned we usually start about 15 feet

and start from there sometimes it's substantially more than that. >> commissioner pearlman. >> yeah. this is just a clarification i mean i look at the sections from the 3 story to a 5 story house why is it referred to as a 3 story edition but it is still you know a 5 story building when done 4 story over basement i guess it is called word why it sound so modest for a 3 story when our tripling the house. >> we measure the height from 9 existing grade so you're only allowed the height limit is a taken from 9 grade across the whole site and a proposal it allowed to build up to that point it doesn't count for below

grade. >> great. >> no further medical cannabis opening it up for public comment are there others who wish to speak on that item. >> i'm an attorney in san francisco speaking for the neighbor to the east and we submitted several letters and think they'll be in a file and in addition to myself lindsey ihere who was active in the recreation of the district and neighbor and mr. hewitt the west bound occupant and one of you i think there was a certain misunderstanding as this project i agree it is now a 5 story project it really is a occasion with a complete rebuild and they're digging down two level for a 3 car garage and

digging down one level for a one floor residential unit their presently 3 floors in the building the toup top two or one unit and the ground floor is one unit that ground floor is being dropped one unit the remaining 3 floors obey a will be a 3 floor unit the kitchen to the first floor and you affordable unit below is it so surrounded by remaining walls and this hill goes up to this is delores heights the top of which is the gentleman's building almost indirectly to the south on 22nd street and liability street is in between the retaining wall in the backyard and proposing a building of 16 inch reinforced

this till hill a doted with those projects it is at hill and i think the geography is going to be compromised the architect said they're going to the maximum allowed under the law over 7 thousand building with a maximum parking now no parking they need neighbors i understand traditionally in the commissioners opinion to put in a garage i don't know if that's been done this is a very controversial project on this block my clients view is going to be impaired by the scare of the peaked roof and then a big square her view to the north is

impaired thank you very much. >> are there others who wish to speak speak? >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is lindsey i'm a neighbor of the house i'm two houses down. >> lindsey if you not put your hand on the microphone thank you. >> so i'm speaking in opposition to the planned plans for the expansion of the resident i was one of the founder of the historic preservation to retain the character of the neighborhood awhile take into account the made up of the whole community that existed of retained and some businesses those were built

by working class folks the 3 seven hundred block in which this property known as helens house who first residents were iron or stonecutter or the other beeper or a sea captain and steward and hotel and all of those properties are listed in here today on page 299 a row of distinguished homes simple homes the current homeowners are aware of the pronounce and proud to main their character at the time of the discussion of the street appearances no threat of anyone stare homes or developers we felt we were safe in restricting the ordinance through the plans were to retain them the size of the project will triple the

houses square footage 2, 3, 4 from 2 thousand seven hundred plus to $7,000 square feet this will create a monster block additional the plan to dig down one story 1 story below street level is reprehensible t i can't think of a construction in our district both measures set an ugly and dangers preebt to our psychiatrist and if allowed they'll degrade all the cherished homes around it i hope you'll agree it needs to be scaled down to the 20th character street and the historic district thank you for your time. >> here's the list of houses on

page 299. >> is there any additional public comment. >> good afternoon. i'm herpes hewitt i own the house with my wife to the west of the proposed project and i've heard the general concerns expressed here any points are a little bit more pointed the movement of the back pod over against our house means the pods will extend two feet beyond the end of our house that wall will like not being able to get to that window plus it be reconfigure and our backyards seems having it stick out the additional two feet it's in my view that having a house that's quite large tlaits there's

plenty of room that needs to be built and no extend the two feet into our says that a second concern we have a dinger window that is now going through the proposed plan in the smaller let that will reduce the amount of light i know with the planners are thinking about ways i frankly don't understand of trying to use mirrors to increase the light interest finally all of the light and the sense that we now have is hard to judge what this large facade will do i suggest we not have it be done but put you up an t may not be feasible it is hard to minimal what this large project

is going to do entail for our yards any chief concerned are the window and light those are real there simply won't be light to the staircases in the back of our house are there others who wish to speak seeing none, public comment is closed and back to you, commissioners. >> commissioner pearlman. >> i wish we were the planning commission so we account examine but virtually everything is not in our purview unfortunately, i won't go into comments about light and mass and size ultimately i think that the steps that the architects have taken to reduce the impact on the district which is not specifically the backyards but from the street are good ones i think the - any

dormers reduce you know things popping off the roof in a normal dormer replacing the windows in the dormer my only design comment the window that's replying the gable and the window seams way out of scale its essentially taking the window from the first floor and putting it up to the roof feels like it really was evident in our skechldz it looked like the window the head of the window really just clipped off the gable in half chopped off the gaib so i'll encourage much smaller pull it in horlg work vertical is probably okay. i think a little bit large that's others only design comment having the garage go down it

doesn't effect the district while someone has an 200 underground is it so reprehensible but for the historic district this has inform visible effect than the house to the east that has a garage that's added at inspected obviously not now but at some point when the building was constructed with a big wide garage door it is far less impactful than that that seems okay to me as to trenching and digging and retaining that's out of our purview. >> commissioner johns. >> i share our comments that is one of the times when the staff has gone through all the

requirements that we're bound by but the neighbors have concerns that we really are not in our jurisdiction one of the things i do sense is that part of this is the app apprehension of the unknown that can't be dealt with those things are for another commission to deal with from all i can tell the staff has done a pretty good job in dealing with the historic preservation i might be grind to support the project i shared our concern about the one window this is one of those cases again

that sometimes comes before us i think it's important we focus on what things it is are within our purview. >> commissioner wolfram. >> i guess what i would say overall i kind of feel like the project is rather over scaled i agree with both commissioners that have spoken if i was looking at from a planning commission standpoint it's a commercial escalated project the rear yard is a 5 story building not having the residential character not visible from the public right-of-way it's out over our purview especially, when but look at the slaegsdz it location a small office building not a residential structure anymore but with that said as we limit