pace so foot wall takes up thirty to 35 percent of the air and light space from our backyard another shot in the upstairs kitchen window you can see those are significant amount of the air and light in view from the upstairs will be cut off if the wall is built there and we believe that the vbts go under the code require that this variance be denied no exceptional or excelled circumstances only the failure to build the staircase and finding two we shot hardship was not created or contributed to the owner here's the owners contractor that misplaced the stair in the wrongs location the plans were approved 3 feet away

someone made the decision to build it in the corner finding 3 this is necessary for the preservation of subject property right we believe heel we'll be losing the property right a lot of the view and light and air finding 4 that it not teller injury to other property again we feel there will be injurious to our property right to the air and light and feeling of closed in and findings 5 there is harmony to promote the individual development those plans were approved with the stairway being over the plans approved should be followed i understand that projects can take a lot of time and work and frustration and end up with project 20 r two those plans were approved in the right

location and the gentleman is asking for forgiveness instead of fixing the problem. >> speakers in support of dr requester. >> it's our findings that only one the dr requester team can speak. >> correct. >> seeing no speakers in support of dr requester sponsor you have 5 minutes. >> good afternoon commission payroll my name is neil i'm the owner of the

property at 235 and 237 under refugee want to address some of the concerns that is being brought for the record by the previous speaker first and biggest one is obviously our all shared in common back area it is a very tiny hear ear we live in with the backyards none of the properties have conforming lots that's pointed out by staff before and we have very, very small backyards we are in position to actually trying to enjoy our backyard in a much more better way and therefore not having a hardship on ourselves in terms of not being to utilize the backyard i want to take a second to pointed

out sort of actually here. >> oh, it's on sorry this is the fire that tom was talking about their house in the back this is a tiny backyard the firewall as you can see is a dramatic fire the hours burned down the firewall has a tremendous safety impacts on our property regardless of where the staircase is located as you can see this picture the neighbor to our reporter i guess that would be east that's a shed this is over growing and pretty sure a discouraging practices for all kinds of stuff this is a huge fire hazard to our property that property is not adjacent to pam and tom's property but your property this property also is

right now being subtracted and they're planning to build a third-story building will then be the same height as our building which will take away light and your that was coming through that was previously 30i9d by the prior speaker so in essence what they're requesting or arresting around air and space that is virtually belongs to another property belongs to a developmental owner that can build a two-story building and in regards for the forgiveness rather than getting permission as staff pointed out

the first plans that was submitted had the spiral staircase where it is for various reasons i won't blame it on my contractor but there was miscommunication not a physical possibly to build it in that location first place we have gone through various process and it's a little bit unfortunate that the rules that apply to us don't apply to everyone in the room the neighborhoods that come forward skipped the entire process when they rebuilt their house there was no variance i think it is a little bit of a shame that we canned look at the beneficial impacts for the

entire neighborhood and actually follow the same process when it comes down to follow the steps with that said i'll give it back over to you for the 4 seconds. >> any speakers in support of project sponsor okay. seeing none dr requester a 2 minute rebuttal. >> first off, i wanted to point out one of the things i skipped over we talk about the neighborhood character both from our you were deck and the upper deck of the next door neighbor you can see along the lines of the decks there are no firewalls on this block it's not in the neighborhood character and secondly we have been we're

in the process ourselves of going through this the design review process that mr. wheel land requested we do we'll be lodging our own permits point planning department and i also want to say that for the record we attended to have a emotion through the community boards, however, when you're asking for discretionary review there are only a few people that take those and those were too far out to be scheduled i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> this year maybe questions later. >> the other thing there are no recorded plans we looked for other projects on the south side. >> you have a 2 minute

rebuttal. >> okay yeah. i'm not sure the only thing i want to point out to the commission we repeating prior to this hearing and after the caesarean hearing they showed up we were trying to kelly whitcraft set up meetings with the neighbors to discuss the project there are several e-mails in the planner who was working on this was cc'd on the e-mails we were trying to sit down and find a resolution they respond that they would get back to us with that said i'm glad that tom's o thomas is moving forward with the variance for his property as a matter of fact his property is remodeled and it's before i build a property

as far as the concerns in regards to the lighting at the property i assume the newly built property they've rebuilt oneself not rezoned as i look at the way it used to but having said that i assume if you're concerned about the lighting 23409d not only cover up the windows all day long but enjoy the lighting but tonsillitis it's neither here nor there. >> the public hearing is closed commissioner moore. >> i'm actually stunned by the degree of technical incompetent when told the stairs were over

and i'm unwilling not on particularly that commission reviewed the defense lawyers and also poitsz about the necessary technical requirements when a stair comes up by way of a hatch out of the reproach roof where it needs to be we're clear we're not code hound we expect the project once it comes out goes to dbi and then gets executed based on the rules the fires separation is clear and in particular not a fire department exit stair a decorative stair i'm in port of it in the right position and adding a firewall past the fact the contractor overlooked it is totally and way

beyond anything i'll be doing as with a large group of people that want a stair this commission together with the department spend a lot of time figuring out where the stairs would be best placed fire safety, etc. is a basic requirement not up for discussion we don't really want to can you remember extra possible firewalls but retroactively in order to make the project work in the if at any point this is not the place to discuss that i have to be tongue and check and staff knows exactly what we do and diligently well knows where the stair needs to be having said

that i can't support the additional firewall and recommend this project moves to the board of appeals for decision on what happens when small business despite having been told by itself dbi where the stair needs to be build it in the wrong space myelitis that's my recommendation of what to do with this project. >> commissioner richards. >> i think that a 22 high foot firewall is a quality of life issue we take those drs and putting ourselves in the place of the dr requesters i think if we went head and approve that this sets a dangerous precedence we will be inundated with this i'm not going to support a firewall as well. >> commissioner hillis. >> can we clarify if he were

were to not want the firewall we'd have to take dr - >> (inaudible). >> not shift the firewall. >> i'm sorry shift the stairs over eliminate the firewall. >> to a point we'll not require the firewall. >> how it was originally approved after the initial variance i want to clarify when the zoning administrator heard the caesarean in 2011, the stairs were in the location they are now that they were built but didn't excluding include a fire call so following the variance hearing. >> was that code compliant at the time. >> it was not but not required.

>> and why the need for a firewall in the middle of the staircase. >> it's a building code requirement not sure i know answer that. >> to me the firewall is more of a fire hazard to protect it especially in the staircase in the middle but neither here nor there the firewall a two-story or 3. >> why not going to the board of appeals this is a big burden of proof on this commission not to talk about doing things against the code that has a physical impact on the

neighbors. >> the building permit that was dred has to come here in the commission takes action then depending on the action the dr filer or applicant can appeal the building the action on the building permit to the brotherhoods, of course, the variance is appealable to the board of appeals that's not been issued yet. >> which mean if we disagree if that the applicant can make a request for a hearing at the board of appeals i move to disapprove. >> second. >> commissioner richards. >> i think commissioner hillis talked about it. >> i'm not sure. >> take - >> are you moving the stairs over. >> that's not what you can do

the applicant is not here to move the stairs the applicant stayed he didn't want to do that that's why he's here in the first place the applicant to seek a further hearing with the board of appeals that are clear overlooking the whole process theiry're basically there to uphold the law. >> a notice of violation was issued. >> the firewall wasn't constructed. >> they were built contrary to the permit of the law the notice of violation was issued by the dbi to require them to build a firewall. >> but you'll not need a firewall. >> the current permit that was

dred shows the stairs against the property. >> accident - the natural appeal would be to board of appeals. >> took dr and paragraph that commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to zero commissioners that places you on item 13 at 360 e.r. reck street a discretionary review. >> good day commissioners. >> excuse me. we're going to have a staff presentation first and then the dr requester will be invited up.

>> good afternoon, commissioners michael smith with the planning staff on behalf of delta washington before you a request for a discretionary review on eureka street within the eureka neighborhood it prototypes construction on a second-story an introduction to a rooftop with penthouse access to extend the building to 24 hundred plus n an approximate increase the dr is requested at 36 of eureka street her concern the proposed impact light and privacy to the front of her building set back at the front of the lot to address here

concerns the depth be reduced at the rear sent from the south side adjacent to her property at 366 the situation is unique because of the dr requesters building 1w5i9 at the rear of the lot the department felt the proposed edition addresses this the depth is held back what is permitted extending on a few feet deeper 55 percent of the lot with the balcony developed additionally the upper floor is set back from the south side the dr requesters side this responds to the other neighbors light and court and due to the up sleeping slope of the lot the addition manufacturer 2 stories above

grade this development has taking into consideration the dr requesters building we're recommending not take dr and take this as property there's no exceptional or xhierld six that concludes my presentation. >> dr requester you have 5 minutes. >> good day commissioners. >> i'm one of the neighbors residing at 366 eureka street we are two seniors on either side of the property to be modified both of us feel we lose a lot of privacy and wellness light for me and it is just overwhelming because my house is

set back it's a beautiful house between two big buildings now and that's not san francisco and i feel i understand they have the right to construct and build but i would like to have them a little bit more airy approach to the building which gives us more light and more privacy that's a big issue the other thing i felt from the beginning that a lot of things were not done properly such as measurements prehearing with a total different measurement than the permit application the planning department fluttered a different angle than the architect that's innovate acceptable i have we have acceptable plans we can talk about and discuss it which

didn't happen and as the time went on i felt like communication was not done to our liking because a lot of changes were presented unreasonably late at the last manipulate to me it was a i felt a deliberate way of us not responding in time a day before the meeting the discussion meeting 4:00 p.m. we have all the changes proposed no time no time to discuss it, etc. etc. i can give you many examples december 19th no to accommodate changes proposed unless we

accept to cancel the receive meeting i felt this was not right to treat us that way i felt we should communicate better and we should stick together and talk about it because it is really impacting our lives numerously the privacy from their deck they look into our bedroom upstairs and downstairs now i have to close my curtains it didn't have to have a square block that's where everyone don't one scare box its cost effective but it is disturbing to me for san francisco look for me obviously with the light and the other neighbor both of us we

have difficulty reading the plans perspective is too small we have to have magnifying glasses and we're not cell phone people it would have been nice to have been more compassionate we have certain things that don't work properly anymore it is overwhelming for us absolutely and not the fund to have proper representation and lawyers and engineers and architects i sincerely hope they scale back the decks because i know they're not willing to scale back the house or have an open your house so everybody will be happy as long as we don't fringe on each

other's privacy i want to see into the bedroom our bedroom i have a package bay area for all of you my answers to the architect note i'll put it out for you thank you. i have the gentleman who will speak one of the despite and my other neighbor rochelle >> okay speakers in support of the dr requester. >> good afternoon my name is robert i'm a friend of ms. jenny trying to help her looking at her situation there i found peron that it is indeed intimidating having to look at

her bedroom through the windows are closer than we are now i've made a drawing if i ask have the overhead projector that shows basically a simple side view this is her property the bedroom window and the property that was build the deck the approximate distance overall 19 and a half feet the pink areas indicate the line of sight in either direction that is proceeding in size in size to the windows on either side i made a make up to show you the situation looks like in the bedroom

and unfortunately i can't show you the whole format but you see the built story frame that indicates the deck and this is the place to scale held up where a person t is standing in front of the glass or behind this is the escape in the bedroom and vice versa on the other side that results in the building is built you have this in front of the window i assume it is painted in a darker color it seems like it is gray frufrm furthermore from the window this is one that is proceeding literally into our face this is if i stand in front of you 10 inches it violate our

privacy but the building size is propositionly the same it is a huge wall a 44 foot wall and you can imagine this wall will be comploes make the windows look like a garden fence i have one more photo this is created the properties the house on the left and on the right new construction will dictate even the light and decreasing the overall light. >> any other speakers in support of dr requester? >> good afternoon, commissioners

thank you for letting me is there any further public comment speak i'm rochelle i live on eureka in a modest flat and the reason i'm bringing that up the architect said i have so many secret i only have 12 because my house is built out been there for over one hundred years i moved in 1973 and the only thing i've done to change a storage area into a little office and a laundry room but i didn't change the footprint of the building when i look out my kitchen window in the modern i'm able to see the light and sun but their house is going to be a