something about parking the way this drawing is shown it actually given the width of the garage door doesn't allow 3 parking spaces to function particularly when there're access to the outdoor ear and if you have, in fact, bicycle parks for a 8 bikes it's across the dimension streams doesn't allow the functions with each other so i want to suggest the 5 mixes of the garage door is not necessary a garage is a garage but it says that could potentially be used as another commercial space that's not what we're approving today, i suggest we move the garage door and take the side light out have two

parking spaces and have an attic with wide assess 2350r the residents to go into the garden space that comes from the garage that we widened the bicycle parking can indeed hang our bicycle on the wall and have sufficient room to do so and those are my suggestions those are a minor change in the facade but the building itself is is a gutsy strong building that will not alter anything i ask we modify this with two cars given the fact that what is this type of bicycle parking are we

doing here we're doing the type of bicycle parking to reduce the parking to two cars that's my sugs suggested change to the partnering and including taking the side lights next to the garage door. >> commissioner, i want to get clarity on what you're asking the garage door is 10 feet in width and that's correct. >> i have it on the overhead you're talking about shifting the garage door. >> to the north to the right. >> to the right. >> taking this parting away and having a comfortable access to the garden pace and widening the biblical storage area that had slide the garden door a little bit further to the north .

>> that's don't believe under the code. >> i'll have to make modifications under the code which will be 3 parking spaces but no problem code wise. >> if i understand my only comment is that the neighborhood the people living in the neighborhood the only comments they've made to any about the project is they're going to be off-street parking because parking on the street is limit in the area and everybody fight for parking on the street. >> i have no problem but one more car in the street will be what their concerned with. >> i tried to look at angle of parking but that didn't work either and straight many parking

for 3 cars didn't work not that way i don't know of any other way. >> commissioner antonini that was the question i had originally we've i you've got four units i don't know not 4 patricia's that is a premium your amenable with only 3 is that all right. with our project. >> my only comment was that i mean two parking spaces one bicycle parking very no problem i wanted to tell you that what mr. smith said to me as probably try getting 3 cars in there is difficult originally i was told 4 and we reduced it to 3 reducing it to two i have no

problem with that, i kind of like the beyond a reasonable doubt of a bicycle. >> i'd like to suggest even if it is strong it didn't work that's what we see i can't force you to put in 3 cars but if we say two and have people that have smallest cars you can probably get 4 cars in but the normal cars don't allow 3 cars in the garage and the go mixed use of bicycles. >> yes. i guess. >> sorry commissioner johnson. >> i was saying in project sponsor it okay with the lower amount i don't understand why those spaces take commissioner moore's word on the fact it is

hard to get those cars it looks like this is enough room but if keeping you informed they don't fit they don't fit. >> commissioner richards i second the motion. >> there is a motion and a second commissioner there is a motion and a second to approve the project with conditions audios acknowledged to move the garage north eliminating the side lights and increasing the area for bike storage. >> and -- excuse-me. and limiting the project to off-street parking parking spaces and including widening the hallway. >> your widening the bicycle space that's automatic.

>> okay commissioner johnson. >> a quick question to commissioner moore are you i mean can can we look at taking a wall away from the bike storage. >> did code requires it be locked by the storage. >> that's correct class one bicycle parking has to be more secure ask you that's why you can reduce the parking if i took a wall away it won't work. >> i have one i guess concern as the motion reads happen once again to have it on the overhead shifting the garage door over and just concerned currently that lines up underneath the bay area window if we're okay with that, i understand what the goal is which is to reduce the one

parking space and provide greater cease to the rear yard i'm not sure if we need to design the facade right here. >> i'm not trying to design the grarg facade but if one takes the color of the door as it is in red it is nice it is showing the building symmetrical but the garage blends it it will be acceptable. >> commissioner antonini. >> i missed when commissioner moore suggested moving the door i'm not what we're gaining we've teen the additional parking space it would come out at the seem place what are we good friend of mine by moving the door. >> the car moving to the north

can get in and out if a second car is in its spot is not enough room if you back up you'll clip the cars rear fender so the movements where o are clear and the parking doesn't work. >> can i significant share mr. smith censure about the facade if we can dpo get two parking spaces is that acceptable. >> if you can prove that the understandably work if you canned approve a building if you can draw the necessary lines do that by all means i want to keep the door there. >> maybe it will require that the space closest to the wall

shift. >> that's possible. >> are maybe the motion reads assuming the angle to two parking spaces and leave the garage door in place. >> limit it to 2 off-street parkings. >> by shifting the parking. >> however it works out. >> commissioners that's amenable to the maker thank you very much. >> so then commissioner there is a motion and a second to approve that project are conditions as amended to include the number of off-street parking be limited to two and increase the bike storage ear. >> councilmember sharp commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on item 13

this is a conditional use authorization thank you planning department staff commissioner president fong and to modify a facility the project site a pe substation with last us towers that features tense for sprint t mobile and verizon wireless maumentd and modify the existing equipment without any change to the area the project sponsor held a meeting to which no public attended and that concludes my presentation. thank you.

>> opening it up for public comment or project sponsor is the project sponsor here? >> good afternoon. i'm matter here on behalf of the sprint i've read the executive summer and the conditions of approval i agree i think it is accurate and complete summary and in case you have questions i'll be happy to answer any questions any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner antonini. >> move to approve. >> second. >> second. >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously and

places you under our discretionary review calendar for case at 417, 30th street this is a discretionary review. >> good afternoon subject property located 417, 30th street in noah valley to the south in the eastern neighborhoods in block of 30th street is higher in elevation and west end and slopes downward towards the and the a single-family home one store over and over a raised basement this as an up sloping rear yard by excavating the floor space

has a vertical and angle that measures between one hundred feet in depth at the corner historically measures 25 by one hundred would one structure on the north end of the lot on 1915 3 structures occupy a parcel and have has the to no open space so for a rear yard it was immunizing divided into 3 parcels that is 1915 the dr filers residents with one of the property in response to the to the loss of light to remove the fence at the rear of the deck and the fencing above the railing height they felt those measures with the sent from 9 hardship property line

windows will concrete no extraordinarily circumstances that concludes my presentation. >> dr requester you have 5 minutes >> i'm the property owner on harper street thank you for your time as he's included the

residential design team recommended the private funds and maintain 9 planters at the height my concern is this center slash railing which is actually a solid structure and i will illustrate this right now this is the street view inch cut away the fad to see the 3 spaces that are adjudicate adjacent to my neighboring property that this is can the neighboring property in addition to built up and the doted lion it the stent to the building and this is the facing railing slash class which exceeds the rear bum out of 10 foot it will be a

solid item that is in the plan here's the plan that was submitted or the zoomed in version planter is 5 by 60 feet long and 3 feet 6 inch high compatible to my bathroom it allows for trees to grow not only will their planter be a solid surface but have a significant amateur of feet this is through my bedroom to the deck it is shown the condition as proposed and if the planter is gone or if a safety rally of glass i recognize that per that pose

the privacy issue i have shown where the planter could be reduced in height or narrower it will allow more light into my home and it wouldn't reduce square footage on the proposed property or be shortened in height not provide a safety hazard because there actually is no safety railing on this side not much of m a drop and reduce the planting that could happen there are as well my suggestion - well point one is this at that particular time is exceeding the rear bumper out allowances of a significant size so it could be considered has part of the building mass and

also fallen material i'll urge for some sort of modification of the moose or stipulation that the material be different thank you you. >> are there any speakers in support of dr seeing none, project sponsor. >> good afternoon. i'm george column one of the homeowners and my partner michael steel is a homeowner and the architect for the project michael and i bought the house 5 years ago after in noah valley and like the neighborhood and grown to love it bought the house to make it our long term home and this addition will

hopefully help us do that i'd like to point out when we bought the how is it was a very poor condition an ice sore in the neighborhood and we've improved the foundation and restored the 18992 facade it is designed within the limitations of the planning code we've made concessions we set back the facade from the sidewalk due to the historic preservation we embrace that it will make the infrastructure better better and it is all of the evidence to reduce the impact to neighbors views we current don't have privacy in our backyard the lot is oriented north soto south 0 so by the time the sun reaches

noon our backyard it 125r9d to be shaded in a couple of hours with no sunlight in the backyard not only because of 89 harper but 11 harper one of our goals in doing the addition to have the deck so we're raised out of the shadow and can enjoy the sunlight as well as the neighbors i want to point out that we have widened the light we will we've accepted that and the planter itself has been widened since we made our first application the deck is reduced and the total width between the east side of the planter and the out surrounding the windows is

almost 12 feet almost half the lot away from the windows so a fairly good separation for us and we've taken away the privacy fence the privacy fence on the west side of our planter we've originally put it in under thinking that we talked about the materials and she didn't want the privacy fence at all that works for us we're more than happy to do that in terms of the height of the planter 3.6 par fit is allowed for the materials into the backyard and the learnt or planter will not building 3 feet deep but 12 inches we did the same thing on top of the garage a 3 feet

planter that's transformed that front facade we're hoping that the same thing happens with the backyard planter we've not planted anything in the light well, so there is no further obstructions but to pull that planter away electricity wall is an eye sore for both properties we've done quite a bit already and interested in hearing our comments that i michael so you want - >> so that includes it with our approval we look forward to moving forward with our project. >> any speakers support of project sponsor doctor you have a two minute rebuttal if you choose okay project sponsor two

minute rebuttal are the public hearing is close commissioner moore just i think last week had a project we had discussed the privacy which in the strong built of in the city is increasing more important we want to give equal rights to people that want to improve and expand their homes but those who don't have any place to go to subdivided it is not combabld one way or another the situation we had a property and recommended a at that particular time to create a separation in that particular case the addition was lower then the window to be looked into that required privacy here it is

exact opposite my feeling the planter is mother the correct solution but i believe that pulling the deck in its entirety between the boarders off the before he went to make it a 10 by 12 size deck is my right separation if i can engage you in the conversation it sound like you had had dependence. >> i thought about it and our resident of the design team was okay with the deck in piss current configuration and project sponsor gave concessions on behalf of the neighbors and concerns about having to revolve some of the scale in massing

they've done they've given up a good amount of areas but the loss on the dr filers one the windows that we can still be allowed to maintain the level of light in the external residents and the folks will have the deck but reduced in size actually provide for the open space on the level. >> we're talking about affordability really protecting the vulnerable small unit i building that is kind of a solid thing to do it still a 10 by 12 foot deck a large deck and comfortable it is how it is facing no shadow and i would suggest that the commission considers doing that particularly that they don't

have room to grow their literally i'm not sure their property is referred to earthquake shack they're very, very small. >> go ahead. >> no, i will- i'm interested in other commissioners. >> commissioner antonini i'm support supportive of what commissioner moore said those 3 plays on harper are north korea conforming structures that were put in you know on a lost that is really a single lot and they built those without any thought of open space for those colonials so the open space that exist was sons-in-law property it is kind of an unusual situation the dr requesters is

asking about the planter how big it the deck staff what size for bringing the deck down to 9 by telling. >> 12 by 20 i think. >> 1220. >> with the planter box. >> oh okay and so it is about 5. >> so we're changing it from 10 by telephone that's a fairly good-sized deck i don't see the night of that being done i'll be supportive it will help the dr requester with more light and supportive of that change either way works for me. >> commissioner richards i think this is unusual you have those tree e three houses close together even though some separation your walling off the

light of one entire house i like the idea of having the project sponsor having the programming in the rear yard 10 by 12 deck is reasonable vs. a 12 by 20 deck commissioner moore's idea i make a motion to reduce the deck to 10 by 12 to allow more light in the dr requesters house. >> second. >> second. >> commissioner wu i hear the suggestion i'm looking at a-13 the suggestion to get rid of the planter and shift even though western wall? that's correct >> over two or 3 feet to make it 12 feet by 10. >> shifting you're eliminating the planter and make the department of education deck 10 by 12. >> the door has to shift.

>> ? >> the entire wall remains glass the ability to look for privacy into another person's home is greatly reduced. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to take dr to approve the project and take dr eliminating the planter and reducing the size of the deck commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 do zero and places you on general public comment which i have in speaker cards. >> any gener okay. seeing none this meeting is