building this would be a major mistake. >> would a couple of weeks do anything for you folks to try to make that better. >> if the condition of approval today were to require a 25 foot wide courtyard is something we're comfortable alleging to now we're confident we can do that and very much like to go with an approval for two foot wide courtyard today. >> you said you expressed it clearer you're asking for 25 feet vertically on the building. >> that's correct for the entire building. >> commissioner if i may interject the chapter for the go

historic preservation commission that's it states for unit needing an approval and approved by the historic preservation commission but then also requires planning approval action as don't today a 2/3rd's vote to overrule the historic preservation commission so in order to adapt the modifications it will have to be a super majority not a 4 but 5 commissioner positive vote to do you want those modifications for your consideration. >> secretary since we don't have 5 what happens. >> then that motion would fail. >> okay. >> and what about for a continuance. >> continuances is the same only the majority of those present. >> i still want to make a

motion for turns. >> second. >> commissioner hillis. >> just some clarification it is the first time i've been on a commission how typical is it the privacy issue but 25 feet at the bottom and code compliant you've button 25 feet for the bottom two floors. >> correct. >> i don't have a huge concern across the street the people eating dinner and what they're watching on tv the it a typical lot in the city some days you have a vacant lot i'm composting with this 25 photo we've got a balance gracious liveability to get more unit we take 10 feet off the floor to get more exposure into the top unit which are already getting the best

light exposure you're saying this is a south facing courtyard is well-taken you're getting light into the courtyard we're not talking about expanding that into the bottom i like the project and stop sign i appreciate the kind of expansion of the courtyard i'm comfortable with the 25 feet i feel that is a liveable unit. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. a couple of things it seems to me i ago with commissioner hillis and would be supportive of moving forward today, if you have 25 feet at the bottom the guys at the top have the same separation my own why the issue they'll be good close to the neighbors 25 feet is gracious but oftentimes when

our right across the street across the street from another structure in san francisco you might be from their window to your window especially with set back of the houses to the street it seemed adequate to me other thing if we went with the 25 foot courtyard all the way up then we would still think given enough to satisfy cost of hawkins concerns not going and rise that type of thing so i'm probably against a continuance and in favor of moving forward with with partnerships agreed to and i think gives everybody a nice separation from they're neighbor. >> if i ask make a comment i

think a lot of commissioner johnson i think a lot of are feeling two different things in san francisco a need to increase the housing stock, a need to protect the existing 40urd u housing stock but a true compression in san francisco from a traffic increase prospective to new great architecture buildings in dog patch but we're starting to feel a lack of retail open the ground and in the neighborhood not feeling as much in the neighborhoods those are within the plans and within the guidelines we've probed 10 or 15 years ago we're starting to feel the impact to commissioner moore's point i'm semithermic but her thoughts are far-reaching the building you're going to build is going to be here another hundred years we want to make sure we're creating

good living generations and while the urgency to pack them in long term pressure for san francisco to continue with a high level of standard of liveability 10 feet here and there is a killer are not i understand that. >> i think that commissioner moore's long term- of a given year of decade commissioner richards. >> i support everything you just said it was very well put. >> commissioner moore i want the architect i think to look at the challenge and find a way of creating that additional distance beyond the 25 feet on the floors it is about light not that the sun comes from the

south i appreciate the privacy issue of bedrooms facing the courtyard on other side and living room on the other side requires something we're all having to basically close themselves in to have privacy their bedroom farrows faces into the courtyard that is what i think is the bottom we're talking about liveability that requires privacy. >> commissioners. >> call the questions. >> there is a motion and a second i believe to continue that matter two weeks commissioner antonini no commissioner hillis commissioner johnson no commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 5 to 2

commissioners that will place you on items 4 ab for the treat street you'll consider a conditional use authorization and request for variance. >> good afternoon this afternoon i'm present the conditional use authorization on treat avenue the project sponsor requests to convert a 2 story storage building located at the rear of a building with exterior and interior remodeling with 5 dwelling units in front of the property is not included in the scope of the work on - the rectangle parcel is 60 feet in width with the 7 thousand plus square feet are the property is located within the rh3 within

the mission neighborhood it is developed with a second story and is an adjacent one story car garage and two storage building located at the rear it is generally residential in character but it is adjacent to the north and east contains a 3 story george moscone elementary school. >> the residents are typically 2 to 3 stories in height and has commercial uses conditional use authorization is required pursuant to planning codes to allow residential density up to one thousand square feet of block area currently that measures 7 thousand feet plus with a total

of 7 units are a cu the variance it required pursuant to planning codeed to allow the proposed two unit building to encroach into the rear yard it will have a rear yard at six 5 point one photo and the subject building abuts the prop line from storage is an intense or intensification of use therefore the project is a evaporates staff has evaluated the project and recommends approval on the subject of the staff report the characteristics include it provides two additional housing stock unit and an existing curve you cut adjacent to the

elementary school project provides 7 new class one bicycle spaces for the residents a need of participation and putting installation of trees to contribute towards the university and the project overall exterior model work was in collaboration with the city staff and sensitive to the historic nature of the site with a categorical exemption that concludes my presentation. if you have any questions. >> thank you project sponsor. >> so good afternoon commissioners with reuben, junius & rose representing the project sponsor. >> i given you a small handout

it was intended to be originally part of the packages but accidently it got left out in any case i'm going to talk about the project and my colleague will show the actual plan i think the overall we have a relative straightforward project project sponsor has worked with staff in order to include a few modifications we have support on the project we're not aware of opposition there are a few resident that are here we were able to talk with them and show them hopefully we answered their questions it has minimal impact on the neighbors what we have a lot of existing 5 unit

building and those units will not be impacted or effected by the project in addition, we he have in the rear of the property a storage building we're looking at converting that structure into two dwelling units so the 2 units are within the existing envelope and footprint of the rear yard structure we're not expanding horizontally or vertically we're uniquely located if you look at the map to the rear of the property and to the north it an existing city property that is in part occupied by the george moscone elementary school we're built up to the rear

property line the left side of the property line if you look at it from the street an approximately 10 foot wide unbuilt concrete area what we're going to do provide landscaping if that area next to the city property is a garden area and playground so we think about changing that currently and taking out the curve cut with landscaping will improve the aesthetics to the south side of the property the side yard we curling have that a have an existing residential building and that particular building does not provide a code compliant rear yard when you are in the interior courtyard that doesn't have a property line

window so the impact is minimal in general this project has very little impact on the as a whole, however, we believe that it has several bends one of them taking on there utilized structure and convert that into additional dwelling units we are also adding 7 bike parking spaces not changing the existing parking garage only adding the 7 bicycle parking spaces no changes to the exist 5 unit building those will not be impacted the only change we're changing the garage door to be compatible and we're asking for the conditional use the density provision require the conditional use of one unit per

one thousand square feet of lot area and the variance of the existing building within the rear yard set back area we are respectfully asking your approval and i'll have my colleague into to the plans a little bit. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission i just want to go over the plans basically recap currently a 5 unit building and 2 unit back we're proposing utilizing the existing envelope with the two will unit building to add the two additional unit it is a historic structure the only administrations to the front building as spoken about

were - are the addition as you can see there are accrual a garage door that exists was added afterward we are proposing addressing appropriate front door to assess the rear door the two unit in the back building which is going to be conferred from a storage space as you can see here are good family - the lower floor that added unit as you can see we have the unit is 8 hundred plus

square feet and the office of the city administrator other unit is telephone hundred square feet good size for families the one in the back is a townhouse this is flat they both will have access to a common roof deck through the staircase through the common courtyard and again, this is maintaining the existing envelope of the structure we're not modifying the envelope we're only modifying the structure i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> imagine from project sponsor. >> opening it up for public comment if there is any not seeing any that being said commissioner antonini. >> sound like a creative project utility angle

underutilized sprays and providing a couple of more nice housing united in san francisco i move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner johnson sorry. >> thank you very much definitely supportive of the reuses of the says that the only thing from the schematics we were given not clear what the entryway into the rear units there was no prospective it is hard to tell from the elevation so project sponsor can you explain that can you walk me through it with the. >> the way it looks from the front with the elevation the rear building was being used as storage so as you can see here it was a very inappropriate

garage door you'll have access introduce this is being replaced that the front door and the best way to see it is through the elevation every single the sects rather that there is an overhang portion within the rear and front building there's a walk away there the the rear structure you access it on the other side and walk through the the door that will say modified on the offer hang they both assess their units through the central courtyard. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioners we have a motion and a second to approve that matter commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson's commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu commissioner president fong

so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously. >> zoning administrator, what say you? >> on the variance, close the public hearing and and adoptive reuse commissioners that places you under on items 9 ab. >> i think. >> good afternoon and welcome back to the san francisco planning commission regular hearing for thursday, may 7,

2015, please silence any devices that may sound off during the proceedings. commissioner on 9 ab for sutter street you'll consider a confusion and the zoning administrator will consider a request for variance >> good afternoon, commissioners sarah of the department staff the item is a conditional use authorization to constrict a building in excess in the van ness special use district it is construction of a 37 unit building project includes 4 onsite bmr units a 4.4 ratio bicycle parking space to dwelling units and no off-street and to activate a neglected storefront

we've received comments and the sponsor will be present the administration during his presentation staff will continue to work with the torn sponsor think the frontage space it requires rear yard variance rather than one long rear yard the proposal 10, 2 to the cigarettes and not provide the 146 required floor to floor height those two exceptions will be heard by the zoning administrator for the conditional use authorization at this time the department recommends the approval on balance it compiles with the general plan and modified to address concerns about the massing and- that concludes my

presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> project sponsor please. good afternoon, commissioners i'm the project architect with the dj schemes studio i'm here to represent the project sponsor we're proposing a 37 unit residential mixed use with two lease spaces on the empowering boo-boo facing front street and first street we're proposing 86 height roughly on hundred and thirty foot height limit we're also approaching 61

bicycle marshes we're required 37 parking spaces in the last few months we've within working with the planning staff and the urban advisory team finalizing the project in which you're looking now we've met with the lower polk neighbors twice and presented to them at the last meeting we gun control an overwhelming support from that neighborhood group from meeting with the lower polk neighborhoods we actually gotten suggestions of doing a bulb out on front street their main concern to activate the ground floor commercial space there so we had suggested

of doing a bulb out in fact, opening up that area for more active space i'm here for any questions and open for any kind of comments. >> okay. thank you we may have questions opening it up for public comment any any public comment on this item? okay note seeing any that being said and commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i think they said they'd worked with you open design i do not see the changes to the design i thought were going to present those to us today. >> originally we submitted a plan where the set back was actually on front street a and the design urban design scheme suggested instead of did

set back on front street to sutter street to save and keep the existing brick facade so we pushed it back and then put the required set back you know on the front of sutter street audience you i assumed you made changes i thought that was a nice project i like everything before it i'm not sure if i like the you know the upper floors are done there's don't fit in into too much with the rest the neighborhood maybe accident windows could have rounded tops in keeping with the buildings around that maybe not acquit so much glaisz but see what the other commissioner say i like the

project a lot it seems fine. >> so we in the last few days made some changes on the flan from what our looking at now on the board oh, so what we proposing then instead of off a 20 feet set back from sutter street we're going to move the entire this 10 feet towards sutter street providing a 10 foot set back and basically moving the building that way by doing that we're opening up the ground floor with more active

use there was a concern from one the commissioners about the bulb out whether or not it is to be done on this option we're showing a regular side without the bulb out but providing the planting and landscape within onsite on the project. >> okay. >> this was the only change. >> that was the major one that we worked diligently to you know show you for today and yeah, that was the one. >> okay anything else you want to update us on i'll wait for any questions. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd raised the question of the bulb out the alley is 17

across or something to that stent the bulb out on a normal street a good idea not having the support by the fire department because your bundling into a minimum right-of-way i suggest we that had another project about 6 or 9 months ago it was a alley project rewanted to make sure that the alley is kind of addressed not an additional turn it's backside to the additionally this is extremely positive but the alleys are the new neighborhood street is more and more mid block former commercial buildings are being replaced by residential so the residential has the benefit of the commercial frontage on sutter street the be