n mitigate that with a window shade thank you. >> are there members of the public in support of the project sponsor? okay dr requester you have a 2 minute rebuttal if you choose >> so the sidelines they are not clear in that drawings but essentially those are taken from the drawings you've seen them they don't address the problem you know it's a descent effort not adding the problem i went into this with good faith we- it didn't happy again, that's why we're here i need someone to understand what we're looking at here it's if someone builds a

deck less than 10 feet away looking at your bedroom is that acceptable to you but to monthly in the room is it acceptable i don't think so i understand jerry rum a saying shawn is building this as his private residence but he can turn around and sell that property and have someone else near our deck what would happy if there's noise it will be difficult for us to privacy in our bedroom. >> do you have any questions for me. >> not at this time. >> okay. that's about it i think i hope i have made myself clear i'm not used to this

procedure procedure. >> project sponsor you voluntary two minutes. >> i think the same issue of privacy can be said about the two bedrooms about the kennedy's this is behind the roof deck a large window facing the back and one can look between the two bedrooms from the windows so the reverse happens it is part of living in san francisco one expects to install curtains and privacy methods on the windows we expect this to happen here with that, the public hearing is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> i want to ask the height of the window that is effected by

the deck patio doesn't show you the string that clearly let's me understand how high the window is up and what the finished evaluation of the deck to the bottom of the windows that's number one we have 20/20 situations a patio on the remodeled fire hydrant and the remodeled second-story deck are they impacting the privacy of adjacent property before i say something i want to make another observation on the remodeled basement plan something i think the code requires not necessarily direct jermaine to the dr requesters you can't take direct access to a bedroom of the garage the code

didn't allow that for the carbon monoxide for that portion of the plan as part of how we're taking dr has to be revised do you see that the department unusual u usually catches those but i want to before your accident as far as the privacy and decks are concerned ratio of privacy is basically what guides the commissions thinking and has to insured in the past we've had to cut decks back further from the side or the rear set back in order to avoid indeed looking straight into a window we've typically duplicate that we need to do that here as well we can't

make a requirement that the adjoining neighborhood has to have a shade that's a different way of thinking i'd ask us to look at on the first story to cut and match the roof above interests indeed enough space by which somebody who stands on the lower patio comes close enough to look into the window i'll say it's about 3 feet do you see what i'm trying to say it would be the south portion south facing portions of deck that sits on the property line cut back by 3 feet so it's

- >> can you come to the podium. >> can i explain your. >> you're looking at the second-story plan. >> can you say which sheet. >> the second-story be moved 3 feet off the property line. >> you're talking about the patio. >> yes. >> it is about 15 feet below the window. >> that's the area where the dr requester has a problem. >> he's talking about the rbld on the second-story. >> i just asked him. >> we're talking about the second-story plan. >> then i is what i said before we don't have as i mentioned the elevation. >> it is 5 foot 6 above the

finished floor of the deck. >> why am i not seeing that. >> it will show up if you look at the sheet of the south elevation remodeled south elevation the window is outlined and there's no string line but it is 5 foot 6. >> unfortunately commissioners it's on scale the reductions for the one and quarter scale is not on scale. >> i'm informing you that is what it is. >> i still think we have a problem that can be resolved by putting a planter on the inside of the roof deck in order to keep people further away from the elsewhere e edge we've asked for that before we need to get people off the edge of the patio

to look into the room. >> okay. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i don't see i mean, i would be supportive of that as a suggestion but i don't really see the need for it because it is noted that the patio is separated 3 feet away from the property line and then the deck go i'm sorry the deck not 80 the patio the second-story deck is being contested is 3 feet away from the neighborhoods property and set back it is cumulative a 6 foot separation and there's losing also a great differential of 6 feet i live in an rh1 detached area that's the separation between houses there we have 3 feet to our property

line and the neighbors neighbor has 3 feet to the windows of her bedroom to our property line that's not posed a problem it we shade it when we don't want the window on she does the same things also i guess commissioner moore pointed out the problem in the plans which we should address there's a motion we make if it is, in fact not code to have the entry to the bedroom from the garage we'll ask staff to work with the project sponsor to put a forier to make the appropriate speculation you have to go into that room first and then from that room you'll be able to enter into the bedroom if that's acceptable so - and so

i'll be willing to make a motion to take dr with the necessary changes with the lower level of the garage consistent with the code was it requires the project. >> second. >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> i believe that the essence of the dr is about the perceptives that is point out that needs to be noticed staff that's not the essence of the motion we have to properly understand the issue of privacy i don't believe that of feet is enough for visual privacy in in no way, shape, or form i happy

to live next door to someone who has illegal instead of a window it's a pain even jigling with shades you have recognize on 6 feet is a difficult thing if you're friends are neighbors it's a hard thing to do we have a responsibility to understand the dimensional intellectuals of versus 8 feet what it means we've done this before we have the roof deck cut or specify a planter a deep enough planter that keeps people away to create that further deck those are the option. >> i'll be one to modify any motion commissioner moore to put a planter whatever size you feel is appropriate.

>> a planter could be ask the architect what is appropriate for the detailing that the planter elements becomes part of the elements and we'll be willing to entertain that. >> it's not a 6 inch planter. >> we'll do a 24 inch wide and deep planter and locate it on the south side of the deck. >> so the corner itself. >> is kept away. >> the l shape things. >> it's not a problem and to compliment and one could expect the table to put it there and mitigate over to the other side. >> the table will not be used

with the chair facing north. >> i'll be comfortable to amend the motion and place the protection. >> i accept that amendment. >> do i hear a second. >> i don't understand the amendment. >> the amendment to add 24 by 40. >> can we position it that's fine. >> thank you commissioners. >> commissioner hillis. >> did you have a comment? just briefly i was going to ask the planter is moving i guess you guys have a solution about the of foot trellis >> you need to come to the podium and speak into the microphone. >> if you're standing up against the planter or trellis.

>> it's the same space as the deck i prefer the trellis it requires a surveillance of on so what do you prefer. >> well by moving i appreciate the effort of moving someone back but that's not the privacy issue. >> it's 10 not telephone. >> exactly when i told you about the trellis your your standing back 14 feet away if you're looking at our angle of the ceiling would do you prefer the 2 foot planter or the trellis. >> i'm in support of the

project except for the roof deck. >> it didn't seem like the commission is going to eliminate the roof deck are you preferring the trellis thank you i don't understand why the roof deck is part of the planned. >> right. >> there's a huge privacy issue an encroachment. >> the conditional use is i have spaces into my bedroom so thank you, sir. >> thank you. >> you've respond to the question. >> so i get it. >> i think the trellis is a better solution if there's a motion and second. >> commissioner richards. >> i i guess my question is is the at that particular time to keep people 2 feet off the edge

or to have a unclear view i think it's harder if we require a planter it would die and they could see through it i rather put the decks past two feet. >> the gentleman's concern is not the closeness of the deck but you stand back in whether direction and still being able to see so shortening the deck didn't help. >> the view lines are the further away the less i see your angle of the site goes off and what i'm trying to do the trellis architecturally it is less desirable it could dark especially the shade a maintenance problem for the people that are remodeling the house and trellis one side is

going to be whatever and it is architecturally not a nice solution. >> so. >> and in the interest of the person that remodeled the house with the planting and the green edge. >> is the planter permanent like 6 pots and put them together and call that a planter. >> i expect he'll build them. >> the decking will be removed and the planter will set over the roof structure it could be attached. >> okay. please call the question. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to take dr and require a code compliance with the ground floor as a relative to the separation of the bedroom spades as well as the 24 by thirty inch planter on

the south side of the kelvin edwards, sr., the kelly charge of the united methodist church. >> commissioner hillis. >> commissioner johnson commissioner antonini commissioner moore commissioner richards. >> i want to make sure the planter wakes up around it and so it is on one side. >> on l-shaped planter. >> would you like to specify how far it wraps? >> that's what i'm proposing it is discussed on the drawing yeah. >> how far is that dimension that wraps. >> 4 feet. >> thank you that's i so let me read that motion book cerebrothe record to make sure

that the maker to take dr and have the ground floor as it relates to the separation of the grayish garage and bedroom with the planter on the ceda of the roof deck that wraps 4 feet around the west side. >> thank you commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards and commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero commissioners that will place you on items 16 example and b and 17 a and b commissioners please note that on december 4, 2014, after hearing and closing the public comment it was continued to february 5th by a vote of 6 to zero commissioner hillis was absent at that time commissioner hillis in order for you to participate.

>> done i was absent. >> you were absent from the hearing but left earlier for this item at the end of that. >> i mean, i watched it and participateed in the hearing. >> okay. but i got it. >> so you need to acknowledge you have reviewed it. >> thank you commissioner hillis. >> commissioners that is the second time you're hearing this matter so the dr requester and the other party gets the same time. >> good morning, everyone. tennessee i can't chang with the department staff the items are a request for you conditional use for three tree building applications an order court for

a horizon single-family dwelling an order court and the other for new construction for the single-family dwelling at the rear and the third permit for a single-family home they rear of 24 order court on state street a 3 lot as commissioner mentioned the project was heard on december 4th and continued to today and commissioners requested several changes which i'll list as well as the conclusions from the be- the removal of top level the proposed structure these 22 and 24 court the architecture difference between the proposed planning for the reduction of parking for the proposed new

structures as an update the number of floors for the two new structures have been reduced from two to four at the front fraud and the off-street spaces have been reduced and an alteration from the front facade has been incorporated into the design at 22 order court to delineate it the commissioners requested that the project sponsor has also proposed an excavation of 4 hundred and 50 square feet to create two levels below grade resulting in a 4 level structure addition at the roof deck above the second-story will be set back and additional the

department of public works staff had concluded they'll approve the removal of the trees pending the entitlement applications from the planning department and the building inspection so public comment over the last couple of days the department has received requests to continue this and its to be introduced to the board of supervisors the staffs recommendations and they'll impose additional permit if the projects exceeded a certain scope that will not halt the department altogether it's not been introduced and not clear with the exact language is not comfortable with the pending legislation in order to proceed the commission must decided whether or not to take discretionary

review and to the single-family dwelling and the new construction of 2 store an order court within anothers rh2 zoning within the district that concludes my presentation. and i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you dr requester. >> sure. >> sleeping there. >> mr. commissioner johns is there 0 any way in light of the fact there's significant changes and a dr request my neighbors and i might get two minutes. >> this is the second time

you'll have 3 minutes and the dr requester 3 minutes if you want to comment there maybe questions we may have. >> can i get time back from n. >> good afternoon. i'm chris may i have the projector please because your time is constrained in my i my neighbors will continue i want to start with a picture of the neighbors and with the tree a surveillance in permit is required a permit is required and a variance is required to cut down the trees we've requested a variance this

is where our rear yards are by the rh2 zoning adds to the character of the street if you step back those same greens are x's you'll see what happens in if this precedent you'll be connecting those dots with lines state street is unique it gives us greenery it has a mid block state street has a character of the street we have today, the planning go ahead the planning reviews those are projects on a project by project base it is getting mocked the the character of state state that will be like connecting the dots and the character will be lost forever

when you guarantee go back by a to the street view you'll see the vegetation of the street and see what happens in the tree were removed this is really the character of the streetscape if you remove those buildings this is what the project sponsor proposed those are the parents that live there and we have videos of them and so we and the bird and the neighbors of this street ask you to please preserve the character of state street thank you. >> project sponsor. >> thank you, commissioners john with reuben, junius & rose on behalf of the project sponsor so, yes we were here last year in september and received significant feedback regarding

the project design we'll speak to a couple of the procedural issues we listened to our comments and incorporated them into the project design if i could have the octavia boulevard this will remove the third floor legally two-story buildings we've redesigned the all of the evidence i facade and suggested we recaptured the floor area by reducing the san francisco transportation authority finance committee by two to one we'll have our geotechnical engineer as staff has cleared up the environmental review we've included the roof decks the only open space are located at the second basement level we felt

there should be some open space to the level that is having the occupant don't have to climb so the activity will not be seen by the street and we're using a hash design not to create new mass we look at order court were not able to maintain a 3 bedroom home if you take a look at the floor plan the bottom is basically because of the hill it is below grade itself second-story has a dining and living area and the thirty-third bedrooms so it is set back 13 feet from the building and 18 feet from the property line and also 2, 5 foot side backs this

is a good addition so at the last hamburger the tree permit came up and dpw has approved the tree permits subject to the approval of the project at this point the city as has a high standard so obviously it's up to the commission but in my thought that's innovate a great precedence to refer to the appeals process for the tree appeal and one last point will supervisor wiener's legislation the roof deck shadow boxing we don't know what it is on speaking to his aid the intent to priority a provide a environmental review process and commissioner president fong can i finish on that point thank you it is simply a conditional use