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 massive intrusion i can see their bedroom from my kitchen window and the door to the deck i'll see their bedroom window again i don't mind having them look into my house they'll have to have drapes i'm outside with my dog and my grandson is out there i feel like i'm losing a lot of light and privacy it islism like

my daughters from brazil so i think those are like a high-class va very well like homes that are worth millions of crowded on top of each other i have the neighbors over and one of the owners looked it and she looked like she misunderstood certain angles the new construction and she said she'll have to talk to the architect they need a certain housing authority amount of skweemg for the closet in the bathroom i - she didn't get back to me the evict said you have so many secret they're entitled to have that as well but i just want them to move it

back 4 feet even two or three feet hey they would still have enough space for a closest and bathroom so just so not so massive or intrusive i've seen from the pictures you saw the same applies to my house as far as blocking the light and views thank you very much. >> any other speakers in support of dr requester okay project sponsor you have 5 minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is arnold's roger the architect for this project i would like to state that from the beginning of this project

from the initial design milestone my clients intent to create a house to give them enough space for the growing family but to be sensitive to the neighbors right to privacy and cease to light and views our initial design to the slide as michael smith pointed out we didn't maximize the building envelope or go with the 12 foot extension as a structure are center you, we go up to the 47 set back line we set back on the north side by 5 feet because it was very important to us that rochelle's kitchen window she is described not be blocked more than necessary we did follow all the procedures

according to the planning code we have our preapplication and submitted shortly thereafter on march 10 i met the neighbors both of them at the housz houses to get the prospective how our project might be impacting their light and prepared a 3-d prospective for the department when we heard back no push back at all on the building envelope we proposed but still as a show of good faith in order for the neighbors to more fully understand because there is difficulty in standing out in the barbed with the things trying to point out things the client paid for a contractor to put up story poles

which about all the corners of the property addition including the upper master south facing deck two weeks ago later i may be seated with the neighbors to go over the story poles and significantly at that time we remember over 4 concession plans my clients were able to addresses the concerns that the neighbors still had the removal of a spiral stair up to the master bedroom deck this was the second measure of egress but my clients were able to do that,

and, secondly, in response to gabriel's concerns on the south side we set back the south wall for 3 feet as you can see 21 feet we set back the south edge of the master deck it no longer requires a firewall and lastly on the fire deck on the two properties lines instead of the par pits my clients will provide rails which are more on those concessions my clients agreed to leave those in place and the neighbors doesn't remove the dr we tried to meet again with the neighbors a third time if the timing didn't workout basis the holiday were approaching we have an e-mail

exchange and my clients made two further concessions one of them to bring the master deck by an additional two feet that would have helped rochelle and reduce the overall height of the addition by one foot we've made a lot of compromised to address the concerns and i think what was proposed is reasonable especially for the neighborhood and this project should be approved as proposed thank you. >> thank you is there any speakers in support of the project sponsor? >> hi, i'm patrick my wife we're the owners - >> sir as the owners of the project is