district the planning code requires the conditional use authorization for formula retail use within any neighborhood district sub property is located opening at the corner of clemente and tenth avenue r with 4 ground floors that tenant spaces it was previously occupied by a simple service the cafe bank specialize in the chinese-american community and has one other branch in san francisco the branch started on july 21st, 2014, under the name of general bank which the definition of cafe bank and has full-time employees operates monday through saturday and no changes other than the signs proposed

for the site staff would like to clarify for the record did actual number of formula retail within the strict is 12 and the concentration of formula retail is 5 percent it's mentioned in the report i wanted to reiterate again there are 4 similar uses in the district department received a complaint will the operation of the bank back in december of 2014 but other public comments to date is 21 letters of support of the project from san francisco resident and business owners that concludes any brief presentation staff recommendation approval of that conditional use authorization and the spokesperson be is here and wants to address the

commission thank you very much. >> i'm on for questions. >> project sponsor. >> good afternoon, commissioners john with reuben, junius & rose here on behalf of the project sponsor cafe bank so the project before you authorized the operation of a new bank on clemente street a bank is operated 83 at the location most recently doing business as as cafe bank gateway purchased it and took over their customers due to the banking restrictions they couldn't shut down the bank so since july 2014 thankful operated as this kind of general bank actually has a sign that says general bank

cafe bank was established in la in 1952 providing financial services to the chinese-american community thankful expanded to other states and one other location in san francisco at 540 montgomery street it has seen the bank is located in an area with chinese-american merchant that relies on a bank that relies on the languages and coveting has hired the same manager who is here today and no physical altercations to the building are proposed those the only thing the signages will be co-sponsoring to the planning code we have 6 letters under you current customers and 1414 from residents and self-help for the elderly that runs a senior

center in the neighborhood they'll continue to provide the services we ask your approval for the conditional use authorization we have the cafe bank personnel here. >> any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner richards. >> i i guess i'm generally more skeptical of formula retail than our anchorage person reading the case report and understanding who is going on i move to approve this with the conditions outlined. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i had a question on the signage it's hard to tell whether it's not drawing it looks like it is going to be cafe bank and going to be in red i guess it looks like two colors

and not sure i would ask that the project sponsor continue to work with the staff that is fine if you can answer the question. >> there are two halo list signs on the walls and one projecting sign that is on the edge or will be on the edge of the building. >> i'm trying to fought the color scheme. >> the reproduction. >> that should be fine as long as you can see what's there that's fine. >> the bank on suggestion of the planning department did modify the sign. >> okay. thank you. >> made them smaller and halos. >> commissioner there is a motion and a second to approve that with conditions. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore

commissioner richards is commissioner wu. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously have to zero and places you under our discretionary review calendar for the benefit of the public that was continued to march 12 and places you on the next item on fulsome street >> hello commissioners. >> staff first; right? >> right. >> can i sit down. >> yeah. sit sir and commissioners i'll be presenting this abbreviated this the request for discretionary review our the vertical and horizon drawings it is subject to the

variance for raked set back and fraishgd front yard and compliend to grant it the drs concerns are for the rear windows and the proposed deck didn't go beyond the building go and has provided a matching 3 ftd foot set back relate with the dr requesters property and the concerns are generally not cause for dr it didn't rise to the level of exceptional in the - recommend you not take dr and approve the project. >> thank you dr requester. >> are you the dr requester your team as 5 minutes. >> we've been doing this for 2

analyses years we received a notice in august everything looked fine except for the roof deck they'll be looking into our master bedroom and apart from the noise it is the main thing the applicant the applicant is here and the developer shawn i invite them to my house they sat on any bed and understood there's a problem if you can imagine you guys were in our master bedroom that is the level of someone looking at ten feet away from where you're sitting that's essentially it so, anyway jerry rum and shawn understood theres a problem came up with

solutions one a per goal la type of arrangement can i put that here. >> yep. >> so if someone was - okay so let's say this is our master bedroom up here this is somebody standing on the proposed deck he even with the electrically list someone can look at our master bred bedroom i asked the architect why he proposed a deck he said he didn't realize this window is into our master bedroom i heard you say i shouldn't be here as part of the

conditional use because this doesn't enter into if the privacy; is that correct. >> usually this is not a responded time let me say it's not the intent you filed the dr so - >> basically what happened with the microphone and jerry rum and shawn they came up with this solution or two the solutions two work and we came to the end of the expiration date at the end of september and i was advised by planning department to file a dr rather than an appeal that's why i'm here i'm surprised the planning department hadn't harder any point of view and chimneys in that's amazing like putting the cart before the horse. >> generally, we're banking a

recommendation based on our review of the plan but the point of the dr to have you be able to speak which is what you know here allowed to do now and then commissioner can ask questions you know based on our response. >> okay. >> so it is normal procedure that the department provides a representation to the commission and the commission hears the public comment and makes a decision. >> you know the developer and the architect agreed this is a problem and tried to come up with the solutions as you can see from this this is just it's not workable if someone is standing up against the electrically list some place can see into our master bedroom no

one can dispute ifdispute if. >> are through any members of the public in support of dr requester? okay project sponsor your team has 5 minutes >> commissioners i'm the architect and the owners shawn and jane kindergarten who live down the street and this is the contractor which is being remodeled for

their needs this is a view of the house currently with the property next door and the kennedy purchased the property in 2012 with the intention of remolding it is a small house at 14 hundred mosquitos and small rear yard it has limited possibilities for expansion and improvements we took advantage of the planning code for the set back line as mentioned which shown here in the rear of the first floor to take advantage of the averaging the adjacent neighbors behind the second line the basic theme of the first story to provide for

space and the second-story to provide a roof deck which is off the master bedroom and additional outdoor spice which is badly needed in this small home the vaccine of the detect is a view to the north i'll show you in a minute this is the current rear yard logan to the south towards the dr requesters property this is a view taken approximately where the roof deck is and it will be in a space here you can barely see the windows of the master bedroom it is an obscure bedroom this is the same view with a deck new deck being superimposed

and the floor deck is 5 and a half deck blood the windowsill of the doris bedroom in the trees were eliminated we'll be looking up to the ceiling this is a view to the north and it will be open to the deck and dora mentioned we proposed a privacy screen this is the drawings we presented that is in the corner facing his window which is right here our analysis the site line this

is shown by this drawing with the proposed screen will secureobscure this makes the screen high enough to block the view into the bedroom this is the view of his window shown in the spur imposed over the screen dora rejected this solution we've proposed it in our design and decided not to do it requires an additional surveillance to allow it to happy because of the rear yard projection and it creates a shadow being in the south side of the deck this is a plan the property the kennedy property is right here and dora's property to the south

his loot it 27 and a half foot wide he has extensive outdoor space his bedroom overlooks the kennedy's rear yard and he gets a view over the rear yard of the adjacent properties we think it's unfair to eliminate part of our open space he can 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