single-family homes and two duplexes to create the units it looks like the size are good and the duplexes will serve and single-family homes so is it you know it is a good thing and, in fact, having one and two and 10 three bedrooms and one four-bedroom will satisfy the neighbors of would have been fine having the additional amusements but don't want to get into a situation every time someone as has a project we have to force them to have extra units but in this case it worked out well, i'm supportive of the project and the builder is a local residents that makes it more expressive? the kind of thing we need to do more. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> mr. towns what year were the buildings constructed maybe

the packet i did not say that. >> the existing 44. >> 1944 the question i had this a couple weeks ago in terms of rent-controlled units the ellis act is there a legal existence of a rer8dz after that is off the marketed if those were rent-controlled unit they'll be in rent control i imagine. >> corey can chime in. >> i'll chime in and say this is that's a great question for the board i don't have an answer. >> sure please that would be helpful if you have something you - >> (inaudible). >> sir you'll have to speak into the microphone. >> here's something that from the san francisco tenants union

and as you can see there are some restrictions their 5 and 10 years that was specifically in regard to our project is the lower one. >> can you read it to use it is too small for me to see. >> from the building is down the road and units in a newly constructed building are offered for rented one 5 years restrictions will apply so 5 years or 16 years. >> so it is interesting i said too to two weeks ago i thought ellis act buildings should not be an additional bump this was my quote and someone the press through that back at me this commission voted to demolish

rent-controlled unit the past they were active rent-controlled unit and i do believe after 5 years unless their rented out again looking at the current lay out it is a inner country convened that will not be renirpd you're not getting the entitlement it's been 16 years and good project i'll vote to support. >> dramatically thank you, commissioners quickly i just want to speak to the notion of going from the to 12 and why we pushed the project sponsor to be honest anytime a unit comes in it looks like it is avoiding but

this week we are concerned whatever a 9 unit building and possible to add units that gives us this that's why we pushed them and also on the orientation of the building the orientation minimum inninmri there is a mot that has been seconded to approve that matter with conditions commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and commissioners that places us on 13 ab for the cases. >> at chapman 3457b street you'll consider a conditional use authorization and zoning administrator will consider rear yard variance.

>> okay giving me kimberly planning staff a request. a qualifying pursuant to planning code section to allow construction of a single-family dwelling on a sub stated lot the lot measures one thousand 5 hundred plus square feet and less than 25 feet in weight a anytime of seven hundred plus and 25 feet are required respect the proposed building for this site and 3-r one thousand plus single-family unit with a health of approximately 27 feet the project is located on the southeast corner of chapman and fulsome within the rh1 bernal height special use district the subject property is

currently a vacant corner lot that is substandard with 70 feet of footage along chapman and 14 feet along fulsome the adjacent property to the south is a two story single-family dwelling the ante a 3 story single-family detrimentally dwell it is zoned rh1 and p for public generally developed a two-story and public space of the hill since the publication the department has received 8 additional letters in opposition and two in support of protein project the project sponsor has conducted outreach through the preapplication meeting held in august of 2013 and met with the bernal height east slope board in 2014 and again in december of 2014

once the project was scheduled for a hearing this january the project sponsor conducted a second voluntary outreach january 21st of 2016 and has been working with the an adjacent neighbor to address the concerns for privacy and security the other issues and considerations regarding this lot is that this lot was established in 1916 - >> from surplus public land to develop chapman and sold unwarned for development in 1969. >> development of the thinking warranted has been redesigned since the sale of the property 6 times the zoning administrator has

denied development in 1979, 81 and 87 the concentration has a non-conditional use in noah 1 and 2005 those are in your packet the lot is a substandard lot in a area of predominantly small lots on a corner it is a curving street that neighbors have raised concerns about regarding traffic and safety at that corner neighbors expressed concerns of preservation of security and noise to the adjacent property and that the project is not in keeping with neighborhood character the project will be providing the required minimum rear yard of 24.4 feet in an additional

location on neutron the if you would to allow the corner of fulsome and chapman that rear yard didn't meet the rear yard requirement for planning code section which is subject to the variance proceeding the basis for planning department recommendation for approval is that housing policy in san francisco has developed since this lot was created in 1960 and 1979 and ti the variance letters have sited one issue it should serve as neighborhood parking lot and further the 2014 housing element courageous oust that are indicate accurate for families and children the areas there are

amenities in support of families and in concert count housing crisis the current development offers a solution that is addressed the initials and further under those a executive order from the mayor entitled housing and preservation of the housing stock and the department represents this to facilitate the single-family dwelling and encouraging the density to meet those policy goals the proposed design and contextu contextually provides a translation and the e slope design board didn't support this but does now further to address concerns about safety at the corner i brought the project to our street design advisory team that

includes professional staff if dpw and planning and they don't foresee increased traffic or safety with the proposed project the existing conditions of vehicles that concludes my remarks on the south side of chapman immediately east of fulsome are the limiting facts and circumstances at the intersection this is what the letters of opposition have also acknowledged that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions thank you. >> thank you. >> project sponsor. >> good afternoon thank you for your time. >> i wanted to take a brief moment to introduce my family and share with you how this project relates to our lives 14 or 13 years ago i moved to here

in bernal height currently i start a small architectural project that is located the fire hydrant office and we have children so when the opportunity as like the previous case a vacant piece of lands that had a story about that and we all of the evidence the entitlement action i thought deeply what a family needed in order to live and thrive it in bernal height the buildings were two large and obstructed the view and pedestrian traffic didn't give back to the community from an architectural prospective your design evaluated the main mass of the unimpediment use and for a conforming sidewalk at the site massing coordinates with the

topography into a neighborhood prospective the nature the design is we work with the adjacent neighbors to modify the design to address the issues they have with site safety we've added security gates and a front yard grate and a parapet a construction impact mitigation measures several changes are incorporated into the plans you have before you and finally from a practical prospective that allows our family to remain in bernal height to have private for a growing girl and boy and cuts my commute the site if i may -

>> overhead a survey of the sites the area calculations questioned at 1, 23 square feet you know it is located on the south side of bernal height this picture didn't do it justice two blinds property walls it abuts the site and up chapman it is served are conversed street not an intersection per say our proposal provides for a ground floor that leaves 68 percent of the site open on the ground floor we have note we're taking two car parking and maintaining those and providing one car parking the building

off-street and have off-street bike parking provide i doed and additionally to note ze we have allowed for a proper 3 foot wide sidewalk that will be encroaching into our property right now that is 19 inches wide not a problem. >> the main level again, a single-family home two bedrooms and kitchen and dining room and has the master bedroom and a roof deck with regard to the exterior we've worked to provide a vertical woodeding horizontal the middle and in the design that essentially takes the massing and locates it far away from the corner and unimpediment

views we've proved e proposed blow a wall belief the sidewalk open fulsome as it wraps around and surrender it toshgz transition the corner from i've the adjacent third story building with the fulton second story dwelling unit. >> the projects necessity is the fact a new single-family home on a unutilized land is no extension that is required a road electrical there is gas and

it would otherwise remain an underutilized piece of dirt in san francisco additionally wooiflgd of the sidewalk represents in my opinion a necessary enhancement to the pedestrian safety and he hope the commission understand this modest 28 or 29 square feet home adds to the housing stock it is only one unit but it allows our family to stay in bernal height the creation of and new single-family home can be debated a specifically but parties we call bernal height home for over a decade and able be able to discuss the relative merits for a home on that site it is important to note that enjoys a letter of support

we participated in twoes slope designer mergers one was as preoperative meeting and one additional review neighborhood meeting weeks before this meeting we actively wet metro with the immediate adjacent neighbors to respond to their questions and several features were modified on the backside of building and the security gates we redesigned the location of our trees not to obstruct the views around the corner and question redesigned the lower fence elements we worked with the rdt and actually worked with the east slope to clarify the project massing it is neighborly and it is practical i extinguish to

accomplish the comments of the people that may become my neighbors it was not different today than proposed here's the picture here's what was proposed in 2000 all 9 previous entitlements attempts were to just domicile a entitle this project was suggested with 10 foot floor to floor ceiling height and the cubic feet this of the not supported by the east slope it is 14 thousand cubic feet with an approval question is safety the road curves not straight in your

packet a traffic study completed as part of entitlements efforts and again that was scrutinized with the planner by the city department at this point there was no suggestions made as to how to address the corner by that professional consultant team you know the main goal to take an underutilized piece of real estate that has a proposed project that puts more housing and keeps a family in bernal height thank you very much. >> i'm sorry is that complete

public comment. >> okay opening it up for public comment and gotten to a point i need glas glasses (calling names) as want to line up on this side of room. >> if your name has been called, please approach the podium and state your name. >> i'm a resident of bernal height also there for 15 years but the south side he and north side of the hill i'm socially familiar with the

project sponsor and i'm a member of the northwest design board for bernal height i'm enthusiastic about this project it does a lot with unusual site a great job of transition from the third story from the second story on fulsome and it is a nice looking design the preservation of the open space the corner is a gift to the neighborhood it is about a retiring building you can button in that spot i think that the architecture they've promoted responds to the adjacent buildings and acts sort of a transition between them i am not sure what of the objections all. i'm sorry. >> to interrupt you, your

pressing the button there >> if you guys can line on that side of room. >> sorry sir. >> no problem. >> i've drive that corner and building that the natural terrain makes it a natural tendency to slow down as they reach at turn and i don't believe anything about the proposed project that will change it will be a improvement to the weighed- width so see fit to allow this family to stay in bernal height. >> next speaker anybody. >> good afternoon

my name is christian a technical engineer and a residents of bruno heights i've known jason profiling over a year we've worked on a number of projects in any experience he excelsis in welding and construction teem contaminate from the beginning to make sure his projects are well engineered and an personal level i've observed he's well licked because mason supports local businesses and mason and his family are an asset i remembering ask you approve the conditional use and allow jason to stay in the neighborhood he loves thank you.

>> i've known jason a key part of neighborhood and he works there so for these a family out of bernal height he hope the board supports this project thank you. >> hi, i'm vernon lived in bernal height for 12 years masonic mason and known jason our kids are the same age and still go to school but the majority of the times in bernal height he lived down the street and walked paved that intersection a decade of walking my dog

i often wonder before this how it will be used a variety of maybe unkept lawn or for sale signs left there and broken down fences it is a difficult pot to this build something i saw the for sale and said oh, my god this is great people are good friends with mason and known him for forever and a well liquidated community member it will be a shame if this were not approved it will continue to be a vacant area and no traffic there is this corner thousands of time with my dog no traffic so it is a good point for me.

>> hull my name is barbara i live on rovrlg koran the general area and also i don't have an irrational be with the design aim interested in the safety and the effect that has on the corner by putting the not having privacy at all at the future owner can put up a fence that impedes the site line as the most incredible to the safety of the intersection also curious about the square footage of the lot as the sum of the parts has taken from the assessor oversees information and accumulate u calculating the square footage for the street right-of-way that will be because of the upper and lower

arc the roadway exceeds 70 feet and everyone is 25 minimum that is 1740 that adds up roughly one square feet the sum of the street the rectangle stape of the tree lots taken together by the tree lots i mean the roadway and the other lot immediately north that have and also has a curved southern boundary to the map is not confirming the square footage of that line it begs the question this is truly accurate to i want to put that out there so with respect to the life safety this traffic study joo 3 refers to the lack of traffic yes, in general anytimely it

serves the policy right now, however, the neighbor at banks pefrl verified the san francisco fire truck and muni bus got stuck on the access to those hours the student making the curves the only other paved streets to have access is that area unreliable and couldn't count open having life safety so it relies on that intersection at fulsome and chapman and the traffic study refers to see a ellis act but a proposal for extending fulsome that changes the configuration of that intersection altogether that makes begs the question of what sort of planning overall it going for traffic and life

safety in that neighborhood that's over concern thank you. >> hello, i'm a reliant of bernal height i live a thousand feet from the lot i've known mason for 10 years i've lived in bernal height and have my office the mission i have 85 employees a quarter of them live on bernal height more of them want to but because of the lack of housing stock i have a similar family to mason i have a boil and live in a big home it emphasize the need for a larger housing stock and certainly appreciate masons need for his family to do so

as a community member mason a quiet wonderfully wonderful i find his tricks to my children at halloween parade he's obviously a pillar of the community and this is one reason to encourage this type of development for the community to keep them in bernal height i'm a avid kooifl i design my lifelike mason to have a recycling cycling there is a storage built into this house and mason is attempting to have a climate friendly future we're all trying to live this is why this project is good this generally gives foot pact back to the communities as a cyclists i use that street on the north side to the ceda to portland as a cyclist you appreciate the

traffic endearing will this will be one of the at least concerns with any approve of safety on a as deep of steep slope everyone is moving slowly this whether there's the visibility bus of the gardens and looking at architecturally this is a very well, good house this is not a monster home it is humble and i think this really does things for the lot it is the type of green home we need to the future of san francisco my wife is a helper to give me and works one of the plots in the community guardian at bernal height she would last week to thoroughly enjoy the bernal height and on

all fronts i support this project. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> commissioners and commissioner president fong thank you for temperatures this time i'm herb i live on fulsome street i've lived in bernal height for over thirty years i live kitty-corner to the promoted development in any meetings with mason he's been very congenial and i've appreciated listening to him however, i must respectfully and regretfully oppose this project like my neighbor barbara we have more of a problem with the safety and variance issuance of this project

ramp the house itself my neighborhood mike ross submitted a letter regarding the traffic problems which will be unchanged with a low fence due to the stereotype steep street fulsome and the sharp curve mr. ross has experienced two head on collisions himself and those occurred because the visibility problems the visibility problems still exist the emergency vehicle assess will be a problem and cars have to be parked if in project goes through bumper to bumper and at the red zone at the end of the chapman and fulsome to the 404 chapman that corner will be blocked for emergency vehicles and vehicle assess and variance to the person that

testified before we saw numerous accidents and numerous traffic on this street i've experienced pefrm that and mile neighbors as well my neighbor jerry is concerned about the variance being issued i want to support him and this as well as the aluminum family that has submitted a letter this project will there the housing stock by one but does that really help the city's housing crisis we don't believe so and also building it increases the density and exacerbates parking we believe we need parking for residents cars and this house takes away parking in a very, very limited space thank you for your time.

>> while the next speaker comes up calling 3 more names (calling names). >> good afternoon. i'm the adjacent neighbor on the south side of this lot i'm supportive adrc the housing stock it is a crisis we need to address i think that mason has done a great job to accommodate the lot and i do, however, have a strict concern the visibility of the lot living there it is to get up to the steep hill you have so accelerate and oftentimes car skid fast so the site he designed the fence is trying to center space between the fence, however, we need to have some

innocence that you wouldn't build a high fence that limits the visibility you make a pretty significant visibility mason talked about when he has children i have two they play and play in an empty lot i thought to make sure the housing didn't threaten their safety as cars speed by the one thing i want to raise i believe that within of the thing that you would like to have issue a conditional use is a community benefit i - that's the part not clear why widening the sidewalk is helpful but the people walk on the lot not necessarily limited in the walk space so i think mason has donna done a great job about the design but what is the longevity the house if you sell

the house would someone build a higher fence so i would ask the commission to consider those variance things thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon and thank you for your time i live on the subject area block only 5 homes and it is a very unique block and i've also lived in my home thirty years so i got the benefit and the curse of being the old lady on the block that knows the history this block has been turned down 6 times in the past based on it has less than 1750 square feet the lot has not

changed more the steepness nothing on this location and it's been turned down 6 times in the past i was here for many of them and at one point told by 9 board you'll have to keep coming back so here we are again in the historical documents and the it was lengthy i don't know if you have time robert did director of planning in 1979 in your packet said that in his negative declaration that granting the prediction to grant the substandard lots in the variance as an insurance of last report because of this allows many access to the construction of a sub stated lot 0 could have the

unsdiefsh thing ham petersburg the fooishth equipment that was recorded in 1979 several homes above i'm another dog walkers i counted 27 homes that this is the vehicular access that is given to emergency vehicles so safety is my issue i'm a career public school teachers and taught and about been in my home it is a real issue i really can't understand how this square footage would maivenlgly there i request this is resurveyed because as one of the previous speakers said where does the street square feet come from part of the roadway or part of the adjacent property you know and then in a traffic

report also the report they claim never been considered a traffic problem and in the same report that robert wrote t he donated that was a safety problem that is as dangerous intersection and just go small if someone has a small home in bernal height they'll not build. >> good evening thank you for having us. i'm lawrence he teach and george washington high school and ran over her to of here to support my neighbors we've benefit here again and again for the same issues the issue how the house he wants to build or redesign the question is conditional use the lot is two small the owner

was explained that the parcel that was left was unbelievable only for conditional use someone mentions one of the focuses was the build a parking lot and if the owner was so community minded they have turned it into a garden years ago i've heard people talking about raising families negative impact that bernal height neighborhood there is nothing preventing them to stay there but in terms of conditional use and the children the neighborhood a small playground what would be a good thing no where to add a hurries in a congested neighborhood it only increases the congestion around that particular intersection i see no community benefit there and i see lots of

opportunity for community benefits in terms of 6 playground and you community gardens that leaves the space open and stave save for people that access that area thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> hi, i'm james maxwell i've known jason and awe mammal for years i've seen the plans i think that a very nice design and modest compared to most of the of what is built and fits well with the neighborhood in regard to the safety issue that people are talking about with cars being parked on the street it looks like there is an

additional parking space that gained off-street and if there is a safety issue with the cars parking space parking on that that same issue exists now cars can still park there now and that can easily be address with a red curve so that it seems to me to address that issue so i think that is a beautiful design and adds to the neighborhood i encourage you to support the project thank you. >> good evening. i'm steve he live across the street on fulsome 0 so directly across from this mason did a fine job of a small building on a unbuildable lands but the conditions for variance talk

about 9 benefits of the community i don't see adding more density is being the best use of that land certainly a number of things parking or playground or open space that would be more beneficial to our community that is a dense street a lot more large houses have been built the last 5 years when people say it is not a dangerous cyclist corner it is really a steep hill and cars alert dramatically as they try to get up around the corner and more density and lease parking is not good thank se parking is not good thank parking is not good thank s parking is not good thans parking is not good thank you. >> i live next inform kim i really appreciate the design as well i'm sick of hearing that

over and over design is really, really nice but my concern is about the safety like everyone is talking about that corner is a really kind of dangerous cars do really come up there fast and have to they have to accelerate up the hill delivery trucks and my kids i have a 14-year-old and a 10-year-old and they do hang out every now and then and the cars come up really fast around the chiropractor i feel lifework this project even though this is is really beautifully done with the height it obstructs that corner i'm a little bit concerned and very concerned and the other thing about the conditional use i mean it has to be really, really special in order to have a conditional use; right? and it is just another

house it is a small house and i don't know if it will address the whole issue about horror housing the city and he feel like you turn that into some kind of a community benefit you know playground or you know a garden or something like that it would be beneficial to the community and won't possess a dangerous thank you very much commissioners. >> hello, i'm gabriel i work in bernal height and i've known mason for many years i know he lives in a small home at the moment i can tell this house is bigger than what he is living in and greatly will improve his quality of life i hope you approve this project.

>> good evening commissioners i'm a citizen of bernal height my name is terry i'm here to discuss the safety issues but my main point is the planning report that you have says this site is below minimum size and the conditional use will be a benefit to the communities i can tell you the character of bernal height uses unused lots for slides, stairwells, gasped and playground that's the character that's what we use those spaces for in this case because of the controversy since 19 61 or whichever the judge it somalia's this is not the place

to say oh, yes fill it with other house we'll use all the underutilized spaces in our hill as we can and the community will not not only benefit but their invest themselves in those kinds of spaces we'll take you on tours of all the fairways and the community gardens the first proposition j purchased the community garden was on bernal height so i have to say that the conditional use should not be prepared permittfor this projec >> good evening bureau my name is andrew here to speak in favor of that project approved by the planning commission at this time and as many people have been

here you most of all sitting through a number of projects i've heard things today, i think sense on this prong will condition the principles that are expressed you have a local architect that wants to build a local home using local businesses and loophole labor you have a residence that wants to move from a units they live ♪ bernal height in a neighborhoods i was a resident for many, many years that i was evicted from by virtue the ellis act one of the things as a union worker in the city and county of san francisco that is a environmental importance to my concerns and the concerns of the members i represent is housing one day in rental stock is worth a conditional use permit

acceptance an untended benefit that has innovate been addressed there is a residences that mason and his family currently live in when this project is completed that unit is not solid it goes on that rental market the idea that the traffic issues are going to be complicated by a local business person putting a small house with sobriety from the curve to maintain safety and egress and improving the sidewalk the idea that is good evening to create safety hazards is well intended as a argument as argument we're not talking a emergency vehicles that can gain

access to a two blocks where their children were born this project will not impede emergency vehicles or increase traffic that project will allow a local residents to continue to their families development and growth and for the addition of one single-family home as a rental stoke stock in bernal height thank youtoke stock in b height thank youoe stock in ber thank you >> is there any additional public comment? >> after this one anyone else want to speak. >> i'm patricia i moved probation officer bernal height in so 78 and over the years all the lots around my house like

just one block away the north and south and the no, not the north but the set and east and west are 10 houses there is a very big filling up of the whole area and i'm glad to hear that mason has so many friends he's and nice person and so are people they're getting squeezed and squeezed and squeezed and it is just very, very hard on the issue of the safety i seen people come up bringing furniture and or moving and they bring huge trucks with go people and stands out well, one a driver to tell them which way to move it takes an hour and a half

for the trucks to move is i'm really against using a small lot for a number 11 house to fill up the neighborhood. >> is there any additional public comment? >> seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner moore. >> i like to is it correct because i heard a lot of words and just to clarify of what this commission side this project is not asking for a variance it is a project which comes forward any substandard parcel that is smaller than the 25 by one hundred foot size is considered a non-conforming parcel and the development that occurs has to

be looked at under a conditional use by which the scrutiny the department as well as this commission must make it necessary and desirable those are the two riding principles we have to use to really examine it very, very carefully and the questions on the hearing on the neighborhood concerns it is that issue of public infrastructure around the street unless the public guess so has identified this street is not in any conditional no capability of providing safety to this site we couldn't look at this the planning department themselves would take this project to dbi and not even appear in front of because the functioning the public infrastructure is the

basic assumption so look at the the history in 1979 the zoning administrator at that time, had a completely set of rules which applied lot coverage for single two single-family homes with no height and bulk restrictions when we issued the rulings it was shortly followed by bernal height coming and going under the bernal height special use district legislation if i recall that this was a while back and kind of into the structure. >> at that point was not rigorous restrictions on how they set on the lot by the process that so i understand parking based on the square

footage of the building which is almost a unique situation in all of san francisco but that's not the consideration but part of history over the years the department advising us to understand and be supportive what we have today a planning commission is a non-conforming lot and we need to see whether or not the building is meetings the higher bar of necessary and desirable and that is when you start to comment on the building what does the building do i think that a sensitive designed building is tucks negative impact in a manner it leaves the problem edges that people have concerns completely open and you could not discuss them but it also does i think to its credit

there is a substandard sidewalk it makes the ability of coming around the corner at least on the pedestrian of the point of view more an inch the building meets the public realm the creation of the public realm with the suburban you have this much the sidewalk because an other than didn't want to participate that is when i think the building self-participate in providing not the right word but the community responsiveness here this building does those types of thing it is architecture yeah, and fun building sits in the right spot and masss with everyone else and from my prospective as someone who is support a conditional use here i would definitely say yes, it meats a critical question that is larger than the site how

do we sensitively add building to non-conforming sites i think this project did that and i'm i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> i agree with commissioner moore. >> you know what is before us is simply the fact it is southbound standard is he it is actually not really that substandard because bernal height is 17 and 50 and 25 feet not that much blow one and thirty feet below the minimum bernal height is a area of small lots to begin with the study allergy abrams in noah 3 they are a highly good firm

for traffic studies says no significant traffic impacts you know from a project even the one that was considered at this point so i think that is part of whole thing and then if there is a concern about traffic and safety issues it is something that should be dealt with in regards to that street you put a stop sign a red zone so no cars can be parked a variety i have things to be done if it is 24 problem the building of this small and well-designed house is not going to change the issues of safety in a significant manner in my opinion as far as the fence size 3 foot 6 inches with open slots i'm not

sure that is part of conditions if we have to make sure that any furthers fence will not exceed that but a more for a restriction of some kind of as mentioned the widening sidewalks and this is going to help things radio a lot i think this is a very good project i don't because it is a vacated lot it should remain vacant this is how we accommodate housing needs we utilize vacant lots that are available to build new places so i'm in favor of that project i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> commissioner hillis. >> i agree with the comments

by the fellow commissioners this is necessary and desirable housing is important and necessary and necessary and desirable i agree with the fellow comments this will not solve the housing crisis but don't see a lot of single-family homes under hundred plus square feet of similar size i think that you know, i think even the opponents said this is done skillfully he respect when the owner and the architect has done i think that works we've seen hours on 15 foot lots so it be done the issue of safeties and traffic looking at the google maps the problem is a car on that corner causes a lot of tribunal with the second street narrowing and other ways to

address the traffic impact the stop signs and the speed bump or whatever denying a housing project is not any less than or more make that more safe so i'm very supportive i move to approve. >> second. >> quicken i'm a fan of tiny homes i think that is the way to go i think it is unusual this is the deck and the ability to look over the hill and from a living condition i'm in support. >> commissioner richards and may i add i agree with commissioner antonini about the traffic that is something that the neighborhood has to reach out to dpw to get a speed bump or some electron device for the safety it paramount and the kids

in the neighborhoods is the most important. >> united states house was on a substandard and the house had full lot xofrmg my house was one thousand square feet it was a liveable house the guess to the neighborhood i did read the history you having had different projects in different are eras this was not in 19 61 or 79 it leaves will have open space on the corner i worry about if there were were an issue with traffic there was documentation provided like a log or police blog or case no. that shows there were accidents

some people mentions a two car collision that would be helpful i echo what some of the commissioners said i think that is an approval that staff work with mta to make the corner safer it was not a requirement but have at least to understand what can be done with an issue on the corner i think conditional use it was explained you can't force the owner to create a park or playground are garden it is private property we've heard the first item was actually a noah valley town squad car the people set upcard tables and they got the challenged grant and all of a sudden it up squad car given the

20/20 hindsight might have been disadvantageous but to do something back when this was the fourth time tool this happened maybe for the next go warn or around you learn lessons i think it rises to the threshold necessary and desirable so i'll vote yes on that. >> corey. >> thank you just to clarify a couple of issues the reference to the 17 hundred and 50 square feet for your information that is the minimum kissed i across the city not just within bernal height but a lot that small in your close to the an intersection the issue whether or not the conditional use for that place that is something that the police station could do as condition of conditional use

and something i can do the approval of the variance. >> commissioner moore and corey clarify that is in the an intersection but it is- your definition of the 17 hundred if apply florida is a difference between an intersection and the linear street. >> sure the code basically says you have two streets coming together at an angle not more than one and 35 degrees. >> so it is or isn't and i believe it is. >> commissioner antonini. >> i think if the maker of the motion and the seconder agreed i'll suggest we include the height restrictions of the 3 foot 6 niches as measured from

the ground to the it up of the most rail if there is one posted the posts are blow that the railways are the things that would block views. >> if you feel declined. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further. >> i mean, i don't mind is that necessary. >> they're afraid of is this if we ever didn't own the houses and sold i see bizarre things people put up big fences or build you know balconies on the top of their houses and never there before this is the on thing the project sponsor is going to do but it protects the neighbors and anyone from building higher. >> i guess i don't know if

this was a second or not i'll defer to the zoning administrator and also i would finding if there is any safety issues there will be a place for mta to determine anything that can be done solve on this report something new. >> encourage it not require. >> commissioner moore. >> i kind of like to ask the city attorney street safety is not a condition we has nothing to do with i find is too specific for us to take that on as a issue street safety is a neighborhood communication between them and call 311 are talk with people responsible for that signage it is too impacting to burn one particular

development for that can you comment on that. >> deputy city attorney kate stacy commissioner moore that is correct the streets safety measures are within the jurisdiction of another agency the planning commission can encourage and ask the advocates to discuss the long term safety with the relevant agrees but not impose on actual requirement because as you say a lot of issues and another department that will have to implement and approve the street manufacture and appreciate our saying it clearly as you do we're observing u obviously in support of or for the applicant and like to keep the dialogue open and anything to be communicated by which someone asked to address

but that is as much as i want to support. >> corey. >> another clarification if the conditional use were automatically has a condition that says you're approving this conditional use per the plans in front of you similarly the surveillance issued has a similar finding and a condition essentially that any future permit on the site the zoning administrator will have to look at it is to see if it is in conformity with the original variance so there is a little bit of a firewall i kinda guarantee view that happens 10 years from now and puts in a 6 foot fence but a level of review

of not a condition of the powerful. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i think sxhoerz point the issue with the traffic safety to encourage the conversation not require it for the conditional use approval. >> commissioner moore. >> thanks for that clarification many families having small children i assume dialogue amongst the fascinate at large to make sure the rendition of any building assures the safety and it is an issue. >> there is a motion that has been seconded i did not hear the maker of the motion accept the recommendation for a finding inform encourage that safety review with mta. >> no, i think we're

uncomfortable. >> very good there is a motion that has been seconded to approve that matter with conditions. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner moore. >> commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to zero on the variance, close the public hearing and zoning administrator, what say you? >> and attend the rear yard with the standards conditions. >> very good thank you. >> jonas we'll take another short break >> okay good evening and welcome back to the san francisco planning commission regular hearing for thursday, february 4, 2016, disruptions of any kind.

proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. commissioners, we left off on there our regular calendar on item 14 an important cases at franklin a request for downtowns project authorization and the zoning administrator will be considering a request for variance. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commissioner or commission carli planning staff the project on 22 franklin the automobile bystander shop the marta a new construction of a building with 35 dwelling units with 8 nine hundred square feet of roll call this is between page and in the

hayes valley it is located within a c-3 g zoning district and the haven and downtown special use and a one hundred height and bulk district it is provided a detailed but first touch touch on policy issues in order to proceed as part of the downtowns project authorization first, the project has a expectation to the reduction of footstep in the district it was determined it meets the criteria and that the proposed will not result in a substantial change in yerba buena park and a conclusion of the van ness fathers downtown special use district the will the coverage of 80 percent at all levels that

proposed will the at the residential levels is 81 percent and the project sponsor will sweet drink one between to each united 9 exemption can be granted praurnt to the action the project request do a variance for the planning code section that requires one room to be code compliant for the street or alleys is 25 feet in lent 21 of the composed units don't meet the requirement therefore a variance is required the zoning administrator will denominator that. >> did i staff has not received comment for option are support in chuks conclusion it meets the under light up utilized operational and have distribute the costa-hawkins

agreement firing reference that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions thank you. >> project sponsor please. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commission i'm council for one of the owners of the project located only 22 franklin straight i own the project being my family and my father start the small business with my brother and i joined the operation we so - franklin stat street we will be tentative it throughout the management of the property we're showing nothing but cooperation and have diligently attemptedtology accommodate many of the concerns of the neighborhood we've hosted 6 neighborhood meetings in order

to exchange ideas with individuals and groups that are also invested in the future of the neighborhood the project proposed constructive an 8 mixed use building with 17 hundred square feet of store and a satisfies the market octavia in regards to height and scale and massing has a pedestrian orltd streetscape we're asking for a expectation increasing the lot coverage to ti rather than the 80 percent let's us creating concrete one dwelling unit per floor and 25 units rather 28 and the planning code section for the record to add 7 feet in the back the project granting those allows for one

unit with 7 additional units including one from three to four that is beneficial to us and the city as it provides more units to the city's housing stock and costa-hawkins without those variances we'll not be able to build these i've worked with the city attorney's office to draft the costa-hawkins agreement and this variance will not have an impact variance on the light and ventilation this is justified the lot longed only microsoft adjacent to our project will have rear yard therefore when guess neighboring buildings next door an franklin and market street are builds they will be a pattern of mid block open space the units will be open to i have an illustration to -

>> okay. so the green is the open space this is you are proposed project and restraining orders are the go vacant lots hiv. >> overhead please. overhead. >> those are the two vacant lots the green open space and these are our two proposed projects. >> that's the light and ventilation of the units will the impeding the access to light and air it is exactly the same as the existing footprint and there therefore not have a negative impact and the proposed project will not block the ventilation for adjacent properties this is as has a

penthouse it is an important feature but a necessity for disabled it has amble open space on the second story and this open space should be enjoyed by all people especially with disabilities and eliminating the slarlt penthouse will stop people from scombrooi the open space and in other words, to have a roof deck it mandated by the housing act that people with disabilities can enjoy the expect like the roof decks it is important to note if the neighbor's house the elevators shaft will not be visible from the street if i can have a overhead again. >> sfgov. >> so this is our proposed

project that is existing neighborhood project and at 98 franklin street it built you'll not see the elevators the project fulfills the transit first policy by providing no parking giving top priority to 9 parking and it is situated we've included a commercial unit that activates the sidewalk the smaller scale as a lay out targets the graphics since 0 one bedroom is that room could be used a dining room or entertainment area if i can have the overhead again here we go you'll see the 20 two bedrooms and this the living area that is will be all glass so it gets light from the open

space. >> back here and as you can see their quill spacial us 10 by 11 in san francisco is pretty good those these multi purpose units provide confront for married couple you can use that with black enclosure for the nursery and provides privacy to have a roommate and use it as a second bedroom this project is not required to match the units they can be one bedroom but various departments have for compliance including the fire department those department due dots ventilation system that will be implemented the second bedroom can be legal in order to afford this we ask

to you grant the variance thank you for your time. >> could you hand the things you've showed on the screen. >> yes. >> thank you. >> good evening. i'm broadly with the design team want to talk about this i appreciate the opportunity to share with you the designs and this is the project that is in the context of the ongoing mid market highlighted the red is adjacent for the empty parcel and abuts the adjacent masonry building and american people alley that provides light and air to the mercy housing project the project project is situated

on franklin at the intersection market street approximately, one hundred feet deep with a small repair show them and above that adjacent alley that informs the location of the project and how - >> it is organized we've met with the residents there on a few occasions and heard back in terms of what we prefer and not like to have there with respect to the immediate area that opens to that alley so - >> the proposed project is 8 stories and 7 floors 28 units 35 total bedrooms and is a composition of frame the facade was ordered by the double height spaces those double height concrete frames and ann mad with

a rich material the 50 foot frontage is broemgd to accommodate the area and noting the project at the alternative floors for added interest the plans is orchard to have flexible living space with that design so lastly the elevators spoken to organized on the ned came as response of evolution to a previous designed plan that in differs to the conversation with the mercy housing we moved that and loaded that to mitigate that impact on the neighboring project so and lastly the building is designed by the open space is it so the large rooftop onto. >> open up for public comment

any. okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore >> interesting project the right location the it raise questions typical quells when it comes to an interior courtyard is substandard because it asks for a variance for the unit exposure for those who face the courtyard when i looked at at a project that indeed brings a good number of units to the market i want to support that, however, when that project asks for a variance where thirty percent of the units are needing an variance to a have enough life enrichment committee i'm concerned there is something we're not grasping i like to suggest that while the project set up for the right thing we're careful to approve

the units not having the proper exposure to light and air there is a unit plans that is questionable when you have small exposure and your coming in into the front door of the unit you're in the dark i have a problem i want to support the project but the floor plans don't capture the essence this is stepping backward i want to keep mechanism from saying this is designed lower ends of quality i want to support the project the right place, however, the floor plans don't do it for me, i like the exterior it is with the units that are proposing and asking for at 40 percent i'm coming

with a double challenge here. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. there are a lot of things i like about the project i do share the concerns of commissioner moore i don't know if that can be modified to make that less non-compliant defer to the zoning administrator we're being asked to you know approve with the winds situation ground level currents and those are exceptions and the other expectation the 81 percent rather than the 80 that make sense it give us additional units for per floor both of those things i'm needing month direction director hicks from the zoning administrator that

commissioner moore raised otherwise, it is a good project it has a lot of two bedrooms and affordable onsite i'd like to see a few modifications on the design i think that you know you, you do a fairly good job of dlaefks the commercial level from the residential level like to see that area a little bit more emphatic the historic building has a emphatic separation and maybe a dwelling unit problem the windows are long and you know those areas on the very bottom of the windows don't necessarily need to have glazing unless you have a light problem that makes that a lot

better with panels rather than glazing those are a couple of design things. >> commissioner richards and appreciate the additional information you handed in i was looking at this last night i've been in friends units not necessarily in san francisco where i share her concern you open the front door and it is dark i don't know what the commission will go through in terms of providing feedback to make changes i don't know about the other commissioners, i agree with commissioner moore. >> commissioner hillis. >> maybe i can ask the zoning administrator if it is more a variance question own this issue ta to talk about. >> happy to clarify so the planning commission has

modifications before that per section lot coverage so theoretically planning commission could approve that that only the variance is a granted for the enclosure a omit a mass koechlg not have magnificence coverage but. >> the lot coverage is one percent but you can capitalized some of the open space areas and get an additional one percent that didn't address the concerns that commissioner moore i wonder if you share those concerns. >> sure the evaporates is just for the exposure the units need the exposure and the rear yard

by the 80 percent 80, 20 provision for how much lot coverage and the lot conform the commission admits will influence whether or not a variance is required the issue the exposure and truly from variance as opposed to the planning commission is look at it from a different prospective and criteria. >> yeah. so go ahead. >> quick comment the project sponsor has requested the lot coverage exception to answer spot costa-hawkins agreement the tomorrow proposal has the 80 percent lot coverage and didn't require the exposure areas but because of their desire to do do onsite rentals and keep it the family ownership they extended

the ti percent that triggered the requirement for the variance. >> i mean, i want to be supportive it is great location and close to market and transit that's where we want hours if you can be specific is it the units 604. >> 204, 203 all the way up and down 80 percent the units it is 204 and what's the middle. >> on ever floor 303, 304. >> can we ask the architect to talk about potentially what they've discussed ichltd your point one window kind of narrow the kitchen and a smaller one the bedroom. >> so the units that are in question this here we've looked

at internally but the confidence we're working towards designing the best units for exposure looking at to consider the removal reform of some of the partitions the east facing units with the backyard space so where we have proposed a one bedroom unit that is partitioned maybe a studio space that reduced the obstruction to the light and air didn't change the gross square footage and the float place of residence but a better solution franklin to the organization of the plan important possible if that regard so i believe that - >> i 203 and 204 i'll mark - >> take that away and perhaps

come up with a better solution for light and air at the spaces and a better solution. >> commissioner moore. >> and let me ask you this. i'd like to aid you one of the problems with that particular project is we don't have a verified site plan not the name of an architect who is the originate our and talking about the lot conform i'll have to see what you mean while i'm. >> we've talked about you were the earth if you're the architect of this particular set of drawings your name has to be on there together with the

verified site plan or a map that basis our context the site around thank you. >> i'm speaking we could then understand the variance workers' compensation of the property to get a larger project that will be fine but at the moment it is words i can't add if you make the administration of the plan it didn't do justifies with what this commission is asked to approve i want to suppose 2 this has to come forward with the documents to understand the variance request that mr. t is asked to understand if we don't how can we support that if it is not in proper context i'd like to hear if mercy housing and the

aspect active discussions about the open spaces you've presenting. other project owners i've not heard about them you need to do a little bit more work i'm prepared to supportive you but can't make a motion to go further into the discussion >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i think this may be a situation where we might have to continue this hearing what we've heard from commissioner moore and commissioner richards also had similar sentiments with the possibilities one possibility would be to create a larger open space and maybe somewhat fewer units or combine you know one one bedrooms into two to make it so you'll not get this high number of exceptions maybe a

smaller number of exempt it is up to the zoning administrator but i think that may be one possibility to be able to or forgot or figure out to make the exception not to many. >> consulting your if we were to switch and instead of 3 units at the back that needs exception but two the back that will turn into the arc will that make you feel a little bit better. >> it is up to commissioner moore to see if she can visualize maybe another time and see in its final form before we approve if we're interested to help you it is a great site and the thing your family wants to undertake we've talked to each other we

like to help you but you have to respond to the questions we're asking in addition taking legal responsibility kcmo if a architectureer architect and then we want this project to happen. >> legally the engineering firm we are licenses to do the plans and - i mean, the life and protection of the insurance and all that the engineering license but have a lot of architects who came to us like bryan. >> what license is it you have a pe or s e. >> pe

we know that is not correct. >> so what you have flvent you technically we have been doing this over 35 years in this town and various parts of california. >> i'm sure the planning department will be able to help producing the rights set of drawings, however, but this project has to basically meet more the requirement we're asking everyone else to do that's all i'm asking and. >> let me ask commissioner moore over concern is about light and in order to switch to the quality of the drawings so which one is your concern. >> a prestige designed in a verified site plan we don't have and the site plan as proposed there are requests for variance

on unit exposure to exceeds what i'll are consider in a sxhaer building we're bringing in housing to the with 40 percent don't apply that's i'll propose to the commission as this project goes back needs to have a correct sets of drawings and have correct conclusions including what corey talked about. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> yes. i want to move the project forward question don't want to stop the project i like the idea of drawings that have measurements on them by an architect kind of made a comment to commissioner hillis i think sometimes, we have more instructions on a roof deck and weird i'm move to continue the

item to the next available date. >> no second. >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> no, i wasn't saying anything i seconded it. >> well commissioners we're full through april and scheduling new cases in may what's the date look like. >> may 12th and 19. >> ask a ask is the 31st. >> march 31st. >> well, i mean that was the discussion we were having whether or not we wanted to keep the dr.

>> once you come back with the drawings and the right exposure will this be a quick i didn't i'll go for the 31st. >> very good does if work for you. >> okay. >> there is a motion that has been seconded to continue this to march 31st and commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to zero. >> commissioners that places you under you are discretionary review for items 15 a and d for the cases on pacific avenue this is a discretionary review and the zoning administrator will consider requests. a variance.

>> good evening sxhovng carli planning staff the the item before you is public initial for a discretionary review at pacific avenue kwh which is located in the pavgz the the building permit to convert the 12 thousand blue second story whatever into a building with 10 off-street parking and 19 hundred square feet of commercial 24/7 the top and basement it is a second story the vertical area and renovation of the front facade and in the middle of the building for a interior court that exists think two one bedroom and, two bedrooms and

three bedrooms a non-complying that is instructed but not - currently the equivocating building coffers the entire lot and approximately 8 thousand pollute square feet in area a non-complying may under ago a new permit but the section of the code it is - rear yard are considered a amenity for residents the residential use to a non-complying is considered therefore the paralyzing is seeking a evaporates for the section 134 in addition the property owner or project sponsor is seeking a rear yard surveillance bus some don't

require the dimensions to date the department has 23 letters and phone call in support of project some local residents and businesses the project pro-proton project maintenance the construction and the project will activate the street and plaza link frontage that attacks folks have received several letters of opposition from the polk street and is russian hill those neighbors and groups request a 45 percent rear yard setback and are concerned with the life enrichment committee and the roof deck my cause privacy concerned i'll provide copies of the communications so including the continuance and in

addition the department recommends the commission 234089 take dr and the existing structure was sequester without seeking a rear yard variance and not the existing infrastructure no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and it is pliable i'll get you, you additional communication pecks i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> okay project sponsor. >> i'm sorry dr requester my bad. >> i ascent continuance request and i'm sorry procedurally if you can adjust that before the testimony from

the lady if i may do that now i have a copy. >> we will receive that request and not accept that request. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner president fong honorable commissioners zoning administrator t my name is robin i live on mccormick a narrow alley and situated perpendicular a leader the pacific avenue neighborhood association those are the faces of the neighborhood and community i respect ask as. >> consider testimony from the project sponsor and neighbors advertise their lives those are their families most impacted by your decisions today, the liveability of our community is at risk we respectfully take

discretionary review and deny the variance as property and ask the project sponsor to respect the neighborhood e neighbors the pacific avenue mcd the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances exits a non-conforming use the project sponsor is seeing e seeking to continue the noifrm and in addition the proposed development is adjacent to and will negatively impact the lives and air of 21 remain properties with a minimum of 3 to 6 and more units in each building so setting a preenlts that will impact the neighborhood and the neighborhoods liveability a brief background pacific avenue

mcd kraeltdz zoning controls to meet the desires of the neighbors those controls relieve the present and planned density recognizing that our neighborhood it unique and praurmentd low scale character of buildings 3 stories or less and one of the densest the city the snapshot use of development that will disrupt the neighborhood besides density what benefit does that design bring to the neighbors the pacific avenue mcd requires a 45 percent rear yard setback of a maximum height of 6, 7, 8 feet or less the project sponsor is arguing that retention the walls around the property will exempt the prop if the

prevailing code this argument should - states a non-conforming use and any structures occupied shall not be extended whether the proposed development is determined to be non-conforming or not the prevailing code should require the building to be brought up to code and pacific avenue is a trillion wide this 3 times the normal width of 20 to 25 foot wide and the wide it perimeter of block one 85 the massing of 40 feet the massing at 40 feet mid block it is e gregarious and should sho

everyone - we're asking please destine a building more consistent with the pacific avenue mcd it is an option and it is a feasible option we request you deny the required variances and enforce the codes required for this low the three request to maintain the neighborhood light our air and open space that is the community fought for in 2007 and was passed by the board of supervisors and the planning commission i thank you, very much. >> calling four speakers in support of dr requester

(calling names). >> commissioner president fong and honorable commissioners thank you for the opportunity i'm awning a awe draw next door to the mid block warehouses i used to live on mccormick but one of the mid block warehouses i'd like to focus on the pacific avenue mcds rear yard the legislation that passed in 2007 creating the mcds required a 4 percent rear yard setback that may seem large but the requirement was consciously developed with the pacific

avenue corridor between polk and - the subject property is one of four warehouses or garages between go blocks in addition other buildings including the variance the 45 percent requirement was created with an eye to the ultimate development of those properties allowing for growth in a way that opens up the inner block providing life enrichment committee for oil neighbors that is an exception to the rule with the garages and accepting the project sponsors argument to render the speak up on pacific avenue mcd

i respectfully ask you not pass this for the mcd mr. and mrs. please accept you are request for discretionary review and deny the sponsors request thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please a >> good evening commissioners my name is norm i'm the larkin neighbor i'm the representative for the neighbors of larkin street many or elderly and can't come they've asked me to speak on their behalf and signed a letter of opposition my family has lived on pacific avenue and larkin street in fact, both of my family's will impacted by the project and many neighbors on larkin street that has been there for 2 or more generations my even family has been there 3

generations my family is trying to have homes for generations to come as cultural to pass the homes to each generation larkin street neighbors have currently a 25 foot wall behind them - the proposed project as represented will have a 6 to 5 foot wall we're on the down sleep slope of the property we'll have a concrete wall and the harrison courtyards puts people a lot of on behalf of the neighborhoods this creates a noise issue being above us the project being above us gives the effect of a louder system mounted on a pole with the sounds downward a 45

setback will amplify the noise please give us the sixth district of 45 feet thank you. >> good evening commissioners, i own the property on the southeast corner of the project site this is going to be the second brand new building on the block after you are building this is went through dr hearing 5 years ago you took the local recommendations regulations with don't intent we provided 45 percent rear yard and then the residential lot and built blow

the lot and retained the side yard and sixth district to match the other buildings we let the sun and light into the back of the buildings buildings on the setsdz of ma cardiac arrest this didn't measure up to what is polk on the site we just heard about the blocking the light of the back of the buildings on larkin the shaded area represents the new building twice the height it is extend backwards and creating that slot between buildings here is a visible view of a red area the building to be built that has the height and width and blocking all the windows on larkin street one thing that is very important

to us the rear yard open space the south part of the block here as reasonable rear yard open space because of the two warehouses buildings and only three or four percent open space that has permeable soils the unique feature of the block because of the mccormick alley the center the rear yard space where the two warehouses building is important because it is the only place to extend the rear yard to the front and the back of the building on larkin, hyde and ma alcoholic their 90 degrees if that structure will be compromised did plans are not acte