david winslow staff architect. this is a public request for discretionary review of 20180130 to construct a four story vertical addition to an existing three story two family house. the building's historic resource is category a based on the position as contributor to the upper grant historic district. the reason for the dr. the requesters catherine becker of 121varennes and howard wonk to the north 128 are concerned with five issues. tenant displacement and removal of affordable lower unit. two, project height is incompatible with historic significance of the building. height is incompatible with scale of the street. four, blocks light to the neighboring building light well to the north. five. privacy to the across the street neighbor. public comment. to date the department has just received two letters in opposition which i have just handed out. no letters of support. recommendation in light of the d.r. requesters concerns department has reviewed the prospect with respect to the residential design guidelines. the

david winslow, staff architect.is is continuians of the review heard on january 24th to construct a three story single family house. the reason for the iians filed by mark christian son of the triangle neighborhood association was to allow documentation of existing condition and requirements of the neighbors' property line windows. it was claimed the windows served as the only window serving a bedroom and the blockage of light could be considered exceptional and extraordinary. the d.r. requester asked for a five foot wide side set back on the north side to serve the neighbor's existing window. staff's recommendation. the windows are not protected this does appear to serve as the only bedroom window as you have in your memorandum package. after consultation with the staff, we recommend that a reasonable accommodation for the window would be to provide a three foot deep by five or six foot wide light well to accommodate the use of noncomplying window for purposes of light and air and maintenance of the window. there w

to those exact same two letters, including the maryland park improvement which was number 3 to david winslowed to have that on the record that i personally have proof that three people did object to this project. i would like to say two things. the back, the lower neighbor did disapprove of a deck that was supposed to come off the very lowest and that deck was about n determine, that was their main concern. they did not want people on that deck half that -- has the -- hovering over them. but i am envisioning a walkway, some steps, i totally agree the deck is good for their benefit, but there be a walkway, stairs, then going down to the side and into the backyard so the backyard would be accessible. on the massing thing, i wanted mr. hollis -- i wanted to mention that my house is incorrectly represented. it shows my house as being quite high, and it -- it is in fact not. it has a flat roof, so it makes it a little smaller, a little shorter, but that is not my issue. my issue is it is a false representation and it shows me house to be very high, almost matching his peak and my house is actuall

mediation meeting with david winslow, so i had a contractor put up a story pull on my roof line for meence that type, which you can see on page 5, and as you can see, it seems very tall. the drawings were revised after the meeting without any discussion at the addition is now shown 6 inches taller from my roof. that is shown on page 6 and 7. this seems pretty unfair have particularly because i expressed concerns about the addition height at the meeting, so i asked at the height of the second floor ceiling fee kept at its existing height, and the high point of feed no higher than 9 feet to lower the height of the overall addition by 19 inches. you can see this on page 8. for san francisco guidelines say a building chapter proportions are evidenced in the floor to floor at heights, and the building features must be proportional to the features found on surrounding buildings, so i feel it is fair to request these design changes to make it a better fit with the scale of the adjacent houses. my second concern is with the top floor addition and the long and blank sidewalls and the neighbors

also with us here today is our colleague david winslow on behalf of the residential design advisory team. the item before the planning commission is a conditional-use authorization pursuant to 303 to allow for dwelling units on city at a ratio of one unit per 1500 square feet and establish a community facility in the r h2 zoning district and the bulk district. the items before the zoning administrateor is a variant for yard requirements within the rh-2 zoning district. the project includes a vertical and horizontal addition to the existing building on the project site to provide a four-story, mixed-use building. approximately 21,734 gross square feet, with six units, approximately 4,672 square feet of community facility. six off-street parking spaces, bicycle parking paces and two class two bicycle parking spaces. the project including a dwelling unit mix of six three-bedroom units, the project includes 6,999 square feet of private open space for the residential units, via a courtyard and roof decks. 485 square feet of open space provided for the community facility, via a ground floor co