hat in order to get the same deck we'll have the deck on that side. >> put-down the deck in the empty space. >> right there but then those that will butt up to our next neighbor. >> it's better to stay where you're at. >> that seems like it makes sense i have my questions answered the third deck two projects the dr requester the difference between 3 foot and 4 foot projection is pretty minimal you want to put a chair there i don't see the point in that one i'm not per swayed the

sent did you agree to it set back to allow the light earlier and it of the initially built without the set back our talking to the dr requester we talked about bringing that in and that way we're at the hearing now it was not agreed b upon by the hearing requester we went back to talk to our architect and because we lost that office space we left it off the back of the 3 story we move that space back in so optimize or make the space for optimal. >> but it could it is a concession i could make a have a fairly good-sized office what's the square footage of that room if you cut off the 2 feet.

>> we lose it is jetting in making the bathroom aushgd. >> that's the bedroom and part of the master bath i see what you're talking about the deck comes down off. >> i have a pretty good idea of what we're facing. >> i'm sorry may i respond respond to one comment commissioner antonini the 5 foot set back besides the deck are code required set backs the stairs for instance will be relocated into one of the set backs you will need a caesarean. >> right we decided not to ask for that mr. syncot do i want to add. >> only the stairs on the

earlier one in september had the stairs not think the other side but on the back it was further away and so thank you sorry commissioner moore. >> it's quite all right. we need to focus what is the in front of united states this has an sensitive and sue the residential design team and it is an expansion of the home and sensitive to and indeed a setting it compromises in a major way so i basically move that we don't take dr and support the design team to the project in front of us. >> second. >> commissioners is there a motion and a second to not take

dr and approve commissioner wan commissioner johnson. >> commissioner president wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and places ion item 13 arrest at 238 presidio avenue your last discretionary review. >> good evening again comblirgz i give may presentation there are additional materials simpleminded by the dr requester we will pass out this is for a discretionary review at a project on presidio after a property located mid block own each side of the street at the western end of pacific heektd it is constructed in 1941 the subject property and

the two property are one hundred feet in depth and 2 and a half feet in width in the zoning district with a 42 height limit project consists of a set back 15 feet from the building wall and 15 from the proposed rear the horizon edition expands the ground floor and the third floor by 3 feet the existing rear wall the existing third floor is 2 feet beyond the second floor rear wall and includes the bay wall and two other plus feet beyond the floor. >> a deck is proposed below the

ground floor and it is populated to be filled in with light wells to match the adjacent neighbor's house 3 letters have been submitted in support of project since the materials were simpleminded the dr requester submitted a - the dr requesters owns and residents of 232 presidio the property adjacent to the north of the subject property the concerns are the following that the project scale is incompatible with surrounding buildings in terms of height and the neighborhood character the project will obstruct eliminate and air ventilation the design

team reviewed the plan and prior to neighborhood notification and found to be consistent point residential guidelines the residential team reviewed the project following the submittal of the dr requester and ask the railing be set back to address the concerns by the dr requester the project sponsor substantially revised the plans requested by the design team this is date december 2014 is included in the back of the packet the proposed vertical position is appropriate and therefore compatible with the building scale up the street and at the middle block the depth is

comparable with sourld property it is of similar height and didn't stent he extend into the dr requesters property this addresses the light and air and privacy and the dr requesters light well has been matched the project does not create any exceptional or k350er8d circumstances we ask did dr be grant. >> dr requester your team has 5 minutes. >> good evening, commissioners my name is angel arguing man a real estate licenses person from

1991 to date i've visited many homes and the style of this city we are proud to call home i'm here are my husband to save our home on presidio avenue from the innovation by our next door neighbors to the south john and janet on presidio avenue this renovation includes a new rooftop view room for a powder room and two decks to the west and east pr the likely use of those decks for entertainment in this quiet residential neighborhood turning a traditional roof into o a rooftop party place we object according we present 10 signed

petitions if neighborhoods specifically in support of denying the fourth floor edition we were that the planning department has two hatly determined the applications meets the standards our block is a residential neighborhood under the planning code and designated by the general plan as having views and it is good it invites careful consideration it is my duty to give you a brief history 232 and 38 built if a lot sub deprived each lot 22 and a half by one hundred feet those homelands were built 20 with one car garage 2 thousand plus

square feet each and harmonious those have shared walls from the front to the middle and located think a hill a set back 3 by 12 foot from the middle to the end of each house separates each home and provides a corridor for sunlight and air to the center of each not to mention quote and privacy we've owned our home since 1973 our children grew up here and had 3 prior neighbors since 1990 and each family had three young children they need the renovation from 1973 never an issue that couldn't be revolved in a neighborly way no

prior renovations have married to double their homes even given the limited lot size of 22 and one hundred by 9 immediate neighbors we ask the four story be denied we ask the existing set back be keep the permitting a flow of fresh air and welcoming the sunlight into our home the requests has been to create a four story high dark minimal light well dear members please give our petition due consideration and they'll add

more than enough square footage to their home we wish them well i'd like to read quotes from the petition we've received from our neighbors quote this change will be a huge mistake and ruin the lovely views there i can't minimal the city will allow this extension quote why a more hormones sign can't be imposed with the adjacent homes is unclear consideration should be given to neighboring property when designing a renovation quote the renovation will detract from the neighborhood and the street by disrupting the semi thank you for your time. >> thank you very much

>> thank you are there members of the public that want to speak in support of dr requester. >> madam chair and members of the committee thank you, thank you for your time i know that's a long at a for you i'm trying to be brief 32, 3, 4 clay street i'm east west backwards to the two lots i've just leader by a nearby it was an informal meeting to discuss the project my - i understood the owners on prosecuted were going to build sticks on the roof in order to

give us more significance of the project i understand they everybody wants to have a wider home only thing i'm saying this will present for us to have a sun special in the wintertime and the light and peaceful set back of yards thank you very much. >> thank you is there any additional public comment? good evening commissioners i'm allen am architect and being retained by the arguing men's to review the plans and hopefully support their dr request >> sir as part of the dr requesters team your opportunity to speak is contained within the

5 minutes, however she can afford the 2 minute rebuttal at the end. >> you'll have two minutes if she wishes to give you. >> okay any is there any additional public comment okay. i'm sorry. project sponsor your team has 5 minutes. >> good evening commissioners i'm greg hear on behalf of the project sponsors i do have a digital presentation so if we could bring that up please project does comply with the planning code and the residential guidelines we had a project and from the outset come in came in with a modest project there's a ground floor pop out the height of a fence and commonly permitted a light court

matching the one that on the dr requesters property the upper story is set back well, from the front facade and away from the building wall the rear building wall is able to be average between the walls on the adjacent properties new upper story per the residential guidelines is set back even though the prominent block phase is 4 story is permitted if it's sub amenity to the roofline on the block phase you can see the shaded area it is across the street from the adjacent property it's unfair to show you a drawing that didn't account for the apparent

reduction in height for the distance we've shared the light well for the residential guidelines their rather faint on the right and the dr requesters light well is here and we share the element his office in the same space a lot of talk about the rear building wall and how that works let me show you here this is the volume of the existing building the upper story is mr. lindsey mentioned has a bay and the second story up would accommodate a 5 foot extension to the edition here at it 11 the building wall and we're proposing a bay as permitted by about the planning code planning code so based on the survey that the project sponsors 0bd the qualifying wall

is where the red dash like like that and the dr requesters property they a significant one story to their house the average give us the 5 foot area rear building line here in red the 5 feet is often easier to see this in section you see the different depth and stack the floor plans mentally ill there is the bay area as well as the polyp out as section 36 c that gives us a prospective view it rains the harm new of the block totally habitualable the ground story shows the pop outs on the neighbors area and above

the deck i see the significant 12 foot set back from the rear towards the upper story edition the project sponsor architect is apparently concerned about the offer ride and i'm willing to leave it to staff the building height is 38 feet one inch tall to the level that's called out on the plans how far the escalator elevator can be 50 photo high the planning code 0 allows an additional 10 feet flafkt the offer ride is 2 feet above the new roof it is almost 9 feet lower than loud the elevators don't need the 8 or 7 foot override as seen on commercial elevators the

override would be that at all the neighborhood is to the opted to the project i wasn't aware of the 3 letters i got 3 additional neighbors letter i'll submit the green stairs are the letters of support from the property owners and the speaker is opposed to the - >> thank you are there members of the public in support of project sponsor? okay. seeing none dr requester our team has a two minute rebuttal >> i'm an architect and been retained by the august man's.

>> it will come on when you speak. >> what i have are the existing plans of the building the blue is the 5 foot set back from the ned residence of dr requester the outline of the existing kitchen is the space that is exist in 238 the hatch to the right is what's allowed as far as an edition without expanding to the property line to the north that hatch area is 81 and a half square feet this is the existing plan of the third floor where the difference between the north and south

retains is 10 feet the plans show that the expectation for 238 should be - it is at the 5 foot line this is a time for the second floor and it is really showing there's this usage stairway and elevator for circulating a lot of people up to the fourth verizon expansion they've expand the kitchen to the north property line but the kitchen is only increased in the area by 4 percent

thank you your time is up commissioners may i ask you if you have questions. >> project sponsor you have to minutes. >> the rear yard he didn't use the proper qualifying wall a 3 inch delineate between 9 dr requesters qualifying wall and the qualifying wall to the setting this gives us the volume to expand 5 feet into that buildable area other than that i don't have anything to address there's no extraordinary or exceptional circumstances it was presented to you as a indication that staff believes the dr is without merit to please not take

dr. >> with that the public hearing is closed. >> commissioner antonini the staff what's the set back in the front and rear how far are we from the street. >> from the front of the wall 15 feet and at the rear. >> it looks like it's a little bit visual from the student one of the views their sun shining if you're across the street you'd the straight on view the elevation the reality if you're on the street the sidewalk level you're going to see much less with a 15 foot set back there's a form at the front of the

building 82 you may see a few feet of the top. >> i was a wondering if there should be a full roof on the top as we have on the third floor because it looks like it fits with the neighborhood instead of a box on the top. >> it may make it more visible by adding the mass. >> it won't make it look bigger there's a style architecturally and i'll be interested in seeing i think the rest of it seems like it come politics as are there's a light well been established for four feet is that in in addition to the light well. >> the neighbors light well currently looks at into the side notch of the subject property that side notch is supposed to

be filed in they'll provide a matching light well the one that will lose the access to that side notch. >> so it matches what they have. >> yeah. it seems like most of the things i'm seeing he agree with staff it looks like the editions z don't have a major impact. >> is there a motion? >> i'll make a motion not to take dr unless another commissioners asia commissioners, we have a motion and a second to not take dr commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore and commissioner president wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and places you under

general public comment i have no speaker cards. >> is there any general public comment okay public comment is closed meeting >> i love teaching. it is such an exhilarating experience when people began to feel their own creativity. >> this really is a place where all people can come and take a

class and fill part of the community. this is very enriching as an artist. a lot of folks take these classes and take their digital imagery and turn it into negatives. >> there are not many black and white darkrooms available anymore. that is a really big draw. >> this is a signature piece. this is the bill largest darkroom in the u.s.. >> there are a lot of people that want to get into that dark room. >> i think it is the heart of this place. you feel it when you come in. >> the people who just started taking pictures so this is really an intersection for many generations of photographers and

this is a great place to learn because if you need people from different areas and also everyone who works here is working in photography. >> we get to build the community here. this is different. first of all, this is a great location. it is in a less-populated area. >> of lot of people come here just so that they can participate in this program. it is a great opportunity for