sorry. >> lou lou you need to in the micro. >> she didn't want the door do move where the window is here daughter is working here right next to the front door it is too noisy people go in and out and she needs to concentrate on her work and then the backyard she objects on building the backyard because her kitchen is looking right at the backyard and she has some objection to it.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> okay one of the reasons she objects to have the. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i think is the what do you call that? a platform or deck sorry because if people are on the deck they can see right into their kitchen so she feels it is invading her

privacy they usually their age closed it is trevor to their lifestyle >> (speaking foreign language.) >> she says they already have the big deck but she suspect in deck has no permit but already have a permit and building another deck her concern. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. any speakers in support of dr requester?

>> lou lou maybe i can translate that. >> any speakers in support of the dr requester. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> she's the only one here. >> okay. great thank you okay project sponsor. >> good afternoon. i'm jason shields the project sponsor and owner and designer etc. so there's been a couple of concerns bought up that is the door was originally moved closer to they're building and then the last design has been moved back to where it was in the photos that were shown before

in regards to the deck in the back our original project my wife said has been changed to make that smaller in scale for financial reasons and consequentially the house has shrunk in size and there is a deck out back we live in the city with three children and we tried to get our kids outside as much as possible noise is a concern for the neighbor i don't have much else to say i'll answer questions anymore specifically thank you very much >> okay. any speakers in

support of the project sponsor any speakers in support of the project sponsor. >> if i may add i went around the block on our street and have signatures from multiple neighbors who have no problem with the project. >> okay. thank you. >> okay. any speakers in support of the project sponsor didn't appear to be okay dr requester you have 2 minutes.

>> yes. >> you want to give her the mike. >> she is happy the rule has changed wants to know the scaled back of the deck what is the dimension of the deck. >> okay thank you. >> project sponsor you have a 2 minute rebuttal answer specific for her it might not helpful. >> okay jason gunning again so in response to my neighbors the deck is 2 hundred and 3 square feet so it will measure the lot is 25 feet wide and i believe that the deck is something around 19 feet wide and it is 12 feet deep into

the yard on one side a wall which is the neighbors yard a huge wall in problem on the south side there is my neighbor and between my neighbors lot and our deck there is the requires egress is the staircases that is a four foot wide 6 inches and the banister we're 5 feet if the property line and right now her building is actually deeper in her yard the only adjustment to the footprint of our building which we proposed to do is to - you all have plans a 32 square feet

thing on the southeast corner of the building that we wish to fill in and that's where our kitchen will be and in also in response to the whole deck and the visibility if you will look at the plan the site the thought plan - the view if you're standing on the corner leaning out over the edge of the deck is minimal as far i can tell i'll leave it up to you to decide. >> okay public hearing is closed opening to commissioners. >> commissioner antonini. >> we're pretty close to a resolution first of all we saw the earliest rationed and

modified from first proposed so we have a dormers on the at&ting space it is contextual but it's not dr requesters problem the door is moved to the middle or left hand that answers the ferries concern and sound like the deck is within normal limits it sounds like it is very uninvasive visiblely so i think this is a good edition. >> commissioner moore. >> move to take dr and move with modifications and proposed. >> second. >> is that what the - and the

plans that have been presented to the commission are the latest rendition no request for the commission to take discretionary review you can not take dr and . >> i'm following the instruction thank you for correcting that. >> so moved to approve. >> i stand corrected i stand corrected. >> this is because the original notice plans was a large plan commissioner moore you're correct the latest rendition they reduced the massaging it wasn't required to be renoticed you're taking discretionary review based on the latest rendition.

>> for the applicants we're approving the permit so big it is confusing but rest assured it is approved as modified your plans are showing it. >> commissioners for clarification the motion to take dr and take it as modified the last set of plans priority by the project sponsor. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and . >> thank you to lou lou. >> and place. >> yes. thank you lou lou. >> thank you for on the job those children being as well-behaved it is equal understandable but want to acknowledge they were fabulous i

hope you'll - >> congratulations. >> commissioners that will place us on our last dr item 19 at clayton street. >> lou lou lou lou can i explain it to her outside. >> good evening. i'm david lindsay of dispatching? a discretionary review of a building permit application to legalize the edition of a between within the building fourth floor the subject building is at clayton street

between waller in the argument the immediate area is characterizations by three and four residential buildings that contain generally two to three units with some larger residential buildings the property zoning is rh3 fourth floor to your knowledge was added to the two unit building in the late 1940s and it was described as a social room intooej decades have spotty used as a convenient and a roaming house the fourth floor social room was subtracted and was ultimately experienced to a dwelling unit it is the subject of this request for discretionary review building first floor is parking

and storage thesecond floor is a second flat and the third floor which would have been a flats similar to the second floor was subdivided into two and a 5 hundred square feet one bedroom apartment at the front the front bedroom was declared illegal by the department of building inspection and converted in 2013, the building was four story had been converted without permit and declared illegal by the department of building inspection it should be noted the subject building permit application bedroom proposed to merge the two third floor including the dr

requesters flat taken back to the original use and it was this plan that the dr requester filled the subject permit was substantially revised to leave the dr requesters apartment in take in the front was converted to storage use the dr requester is norbert and he apologize if i mispronounced your name his concerns were stated in the dr application appear to be a physical aspects of the building fourth floor when is where it is to be legalized and the fourth floor is not the design that it detracks from the historical character of the neighborhood

and the fourth floor should be setback 15 feet as directed by the residential guidelines. >> from the physical form of the buildings 4 story was constructed with permit decades ago it is not within the purify purview it is the departments position the dr has not showed exceptional or extraordinary circumstances not take dr and approve as proposed. >> dr requester. >> i've worked with robert to write the dr basically, i think the summary a correct we're not opposed to the project but opposed to the design of the project it didn't respect the characteristics of the neighborhood no setback obtain

on the building nothing to differentiate the building from the old and new communication addition the breaks clayton is a steep hill and the roofline is broken by this edition who the residential guidelines imply to a building rezoned into reaching to rh3 rh3 i assume you could get the developer to meet the residential design guidelines but i'm not sure if this is okay. >> okay. thank you are there any speakers support of dr requester. >> hi, i'm david a next door

neighbor to 735 and 731 clayton street i have a quick slide on the overhead if that can be shown i'm opposed to the structure i'm not sure what the purview of the committee is here but i've seen the construction going before interests a lot of flagrant violations we've caught them and the owner of the building seems to go back and change things when he's caught illegal units upstairs and downstairs and illegal housing with the water running 0 through the basement of the with a family we have concerns about the view overhead

jetting out i used to know the neighbor one up and he had to construct a fence to segregate his property i know it's been there for a long time the illegal construction but labor day a double white caravan is stuck didn't look at all like its an original building although it's been there for many, many years. >> thank you. any other speakers in support of the dr requester. >> hi, i'm mike i live across the street from the property in question and a single-family dwelling i've building or live there 21 years i own the property this thing is an eye sore the whole building is notorious for

being parolee maintained with illegal units and right now the unit in question at the top a boarded up i get to look at plywood windows for years and when it has had tenants they've bun route i didn't and people living in the garage in the past it is just - we talk about it and the neighbors talk about that particular property as being a bad element in the neighborhood they're not in good faith there's a lot of a long time people that live in the neighborhood and they take care of their property like i do one of the concerns also from what it looks like a lot of bedrooms on the top of this thing i don't have much faith this will be rented out at a long

time property that is most likely short term there are already within having feet of my property 5 short-term rentals that used to be long-term rentals in character with this neighborhood they've they've not mitigated the parking concerns a problem with the parking and if they'll add that many bedrooms where are you going to park the cars thank you. >> okay. is there another speaker? >> i don't know if i'm knowledgeable to speak we're the authors the direct she's spoken. >> you can speak under the 2

minute rebuttal. >> any other speakers project sponsor. >> so good evening roars representing the project sponsor and owner i have the engineer and the project sponsor to answer questions first of all, i want to apologize in terms of the permit history it is confusing at best and a little bit spotty at times i perp have been involved in the project and the purpose we're here today to make right and clear what is in that building we can't go backwards but what is it could go, 80 to be it is what it is what we have an existing 4 story building a fourth floor right now is not legal unit it is

legally stock brokerage an existing tenant on the second floor above the garage level and another on the third floor so no work will occur there i know the original 311 notice was sent out some work regarding the dr requesters unit the idea to merge that and make his unit larger this was a concern that the dr requester has revised it no impact to the dr requester or the tenants project merely is taking that fourth floor currently under utilities the code didn't allow 3 units for the rh3 zone we're not changing the zoning but want to utilize that and make it into

a legal unit in terms of parking that was raised there's a garage on the ground level it has 3 spaces the code requires one spaces for every 3 unit we're in experience and i think in general i know the dr requester raised concerns of the residential guidelines and the physical structure you know that is important to needed we have an exist structure we're not proposing any exterior authorizations only the rear where the fire escape and the stairs to reinforce so look at the guidelines those specifically when i look at the text of the residential guidelines they apply to the projects that modify the buildings height and depth this

is not that significant there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances i realize that the past history may not be the best history we can only go forward we ask you not take dr to have 3 legal units one on each floor with the dr requesters that that concludes my remarks. >> any speakers in support of dr requester. >> seeing none dr requester you have a two minute rebuttal. >> oh, i'm sure you're right. >> good evening. i'm a resident on clayton street i've

lived in ash tray for 20 years the argument is a beautiful part of the city and very krment diverse area lots of new people and as such i want to see the building brought up to the modern keyed with a 15 foot setback so it is not bliebt as my across the street neighbor said it is a bliebt for quite a few of the years even when there was don't of coming and going and out of character with the neighborhood since it is declared illegal the units has been demolished and currently a storage unit i believe that is time to apply the current residential building standards to this unit and put a

15 setback so it is in line with the beauty of rest of the neighborhood and fits in with what everybody seize coming up and down our streets that's all i have to say. >> okay project sponsor you have two minute rebuttal. >> the point we have a code compliant project we're in the 3 unit with the rh3 with an exist building and simply you know the fourth floor is simply under utility as a storage it is appropriate for a dwelling unit provides for 18 hundred square feet of residential space for a dwelling unit so, i mean weren't to the boarding of the windows i think that relates to the current status of storage but making this a storage unit as

noted that will be compliant with the windows and what noted i don't have anything else. >> public hearing is closed and opening to supervisors commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i don't see a basis for dr i realize this up to this point in time we were asking for a setback this was permitted on march first 1948 that's where they want to be the additional floor to end towards clayton street not within our purview to make that cause that to have to be modified or cut back the other issues are largely enforcement issues which will come under the purview of the

police department or the department of public health building inspection if there are things not being done as she should be or legally occupants as far as the parking issue there is a 3 car garage as pointed out that makes that code compliant and in terms of short-term rentals laws this unit as well as the entire building will be subject to the law city laws whether laws in effect i don't see anything i move to take not take dr. >> i wish i could wave my magic withstand or wander to make it look better now i know why we have guidelines i'll ask the project sponsor to maybe you can

apply the secretary of i interior standards to make it look better. >> commissioner moore. >> the floor plan for this is still a little bit odd it looks like group housing ami i've not seen a living room as large as a full place with a berm off the living room this is a unusual configuration and the bedroom laid out more thoughts with the floor plan this would look different it contradicts any family functioning thing if you want to look at it there's a bedroom off the living room the living room is not that large for as many people that are supposedly living up there one family that is a little bit