Transcripts For SFGTV Government Access Programming 20240713

Plumtree, they ripped out our mutual fence without prior notification nor consent and most egregiously, they redrew the Property Line of the retaining wall on the new without notification or consent. I lost a full 60 inches in this redrawing of the Property Line. My complaint is currently being investigated by the d. B. I. I dont know what other neighbors are experiencing, but from my perspective, theres a proven history of do first and ask for forgiveness later. All the above were discovered by me. I would have to get upset, notify them, then they would concede and fix the offences. You cannot on kill a 40yearold tree. Not once did they offer to fix things, not once did they tell me of a disassembly of a shared entity for development. [indiscernible] they certainly dont know how to be a good neighbor. Now lets talk about the currently approved plans. They were approved to the property goes from his 1200 to 7,000 square feet. For comparison, the average home in the square in the neighborhood is 1300 square feet thank you. Your time is up. You will get a twominute rebuttal later. Make those comments later. Thank you. Do we have any Public Comment in support of the d. R. Requester . Come on up now, please. This is my first time speaking here so im not quite sure how to do this. Let me see if i can get this phone working here. Okay. I live at 141 fairmount street which is northeast of the proposed project. I have lived there for 36 years. I have owned that property and i was never informed this property was going to be built. This is in los angeles and it is called a monster house, as it was pointed out, it is totally inappropriate for this neighborhood, which is 1500 to 2,000 square feet. This is 4,000 square feet. As you can see from this picture , as it exists now, this is a picture taken from my bedroom window, and it exists now with significant privacy concerns. Im sure that the proposed additions oh, further exacerbates privacy concerns so i am opposed to the proposal to expand with a roof deck and more windows. I think that is all the questions i have. Thank you. Thank you. Any other Public Comment in support of the d. R. Requester . Come on up. Come on up. This is your time. [reading names] thank you to the members of the plan commission. My name is joseph and my family has been at this location since 1962. It is still the family home and the house a grove been. Unfortunately, are lies have been change for the worse a buildout of the 240 monstrosity. We have lost our privacy, sunlight, and our quality of life. From day one, of a conversation plan for the architect and developers has been geared towards maximizing profit without regard to the quality of life of the surrounding neighbors. It was the crown jewel of our neighborhood, an actual sentry Old Farmhouse located literally in the middle of the block with an enormous front yard. People would stop and take pictures on a daily basis. That is all gone. Obliterated by greed and over 7,000 square feet consisting of a second added building containing two more units that no teacher, policeman, firemen, or artist could ever afford. Rising like this tower over the adjacent singlefamily home from the block, the fourstory edifice is completely out of character. What could be worse, let me tell you. After series of unfortunate shenanigans by the developer, the new building began to take shape over the last two years, the outline formed according to the agreedupon plans, which included a wall of glass running along the entire southside on the top level facing the sun, and each floortoceiling windows on the front side and more windows at the rear, which is the west side. There were no windows at all on the north side adhering to the plan. 8foot cut outs appeared on the north side top floor presumably for another wall of glass. This was never in any plans and are ever discussed. This is a game changer. I formally believe that the developers planned all along to put a wall of windows on the north side to gain downtown views and packet another few hundred thousand dollars in profit. No reputable builder would forget something that can make them so much extra money, and they would know the negative impact on the adjacent homes this would create, thus the classic bait and switch routine. Then they have the nerve to try and hide it with a small window addition and sneak it through at the last minute. Im a proud native san franciscan who has lived here all my life. I have experience firsthand the changes that we have seen throughout the years, both good and bad. Were at a Pivotal Point in our history. We must be a balance between. Profit for profits sake and the quality of life in our neighborhoods. This is where you all come in. We need you to do the right thing. We are pleading with you to make the tough decisions concerning concerning when enough is enough and to give some selfdetermination back to your taxpaying citizens of this grace great city. Deny this latest track and prevent another wall of windows from turning this house into a four story glass atrocity. Thank you. Thank you. Any other Public Comment on this item . In favor of the d. R. Requester. Good afternoon, commissioners i would like to thank you for allowing me to be here. This is the second time i have been in this room for the last 20 years. I was at the very first meet and greet and we met in the old burnedout garage. I was medially concerned about two things. One of them was the size of the project. It was totally out of character with the neighborhood, and the second thing was parking. There are four Parking Spaces in an underground garage that is currently planned, and this is for both houses. They took a threebedroom property and made nine bedrooms out of it. One has five bedrooms and one has four. I see that it will probably a blood one or two of those bedrooms in each unit and those people are going to need cars. I was concerned about the parking and also the character. I did not have too much of a privacy issue although my backyard my patio is totally in view of these new windows now that is a further thing that i have is a privacy issue. That is all i have to say. Thank you. Thank you next speaker, please. I live at 135 fairmount street and i have owned the property for 30 years. I want my bathroom one day and looked up and there was a construction worker looking right into my bathroom. They put these windows in without letting us know from the plans that they were going to do that and it just destroys all my privacy it was a horrible shock to me and i dont want to put blinds or anything up because ive always enjoyed looking out over my garden. That is one of my joys in life. I was thoroughly shocked. Any other Public Comment in support of the d. R. Requester . Public comment is closed. We will now hear from the project sponsor. You will get your turn. I promise you. Good afternoon. I am from a law firm on behalf of the project sponsor. We are here today to clean up a little bit. This house was previously approved in 2017 and if i could have the overhead, please it was approved with mendoza on the northeast facade adjacent to the d. R. Requesters home there was an original window approved. Please pull the microphone so we can hear you. This window was previously approved and now we are seeking to adjust the orientation of it. And over here, at two more windows on the elevation in the media room. The reason for the windows in the media room is because initially one presented, we had hoped to have the front facade with glass doors with an accordion to allow in a lot of light for the media room. Unfortunately through the Design Review process, that has changed there was accordion doors. That has changed. There is not much Sunlight Exposure into that media room. In order to give that exposure, we are proposing to add these two fire rated windows. The windows would be set back with threefoot benches that will prevent people in the media room from going up to peer across into other people into the d. R. Requesters home. We understand the d. R. Requester s privacy concerns and we have tried to meet with them to address them but we have been unsuccessful at setting up a meeting. That being said, we have offered some concessions that we would hope alleviate their concerns. We have proposed changing the rear window, the one that was previously approved, the orientation has changed. It is window 301. It would be changed to an opaque window and allow light in, but it wouldnt allow people to look out into the d. R. Requesters home. The deer requesters concern is based on his proposed two story horizontal expansion with roof deck. That window would look over the roof deck so that is why we think having this opaque window would help ease that problem, in addition, we are proposing to contribute 2,000 to the d. R. Requester for installation of trees or vegetation here mean planters to shield that window that is closer to window three 03 for anyone being able to look into the d. R. Requesters roof deck we are here as a cleanup of the adjustments that were made before. We had we taken the time, we thought it could be a proper etiquette etiquette layout into the media room. We are here seeking to add these two fire windows. They will not be operable or make the other one opaque and change the horizontal orientation to vertical. We are happy to answer any questions that commissioners may have. Thank you. Do we have any Public Comment in support of the project sponsor . Okay, with that, Public Comment is closed. You get a two minute rebuttal. I will use the two minutes and try to plead my presentation the project would propose and go from 1200 square feet to 7,000 square feet for comparison. The average home in the neighborhood is 1300 square feet this is an email dammit. All right. This is an email that underscores the deceptive nature of Gamma Construction for construction of a modest, threestory singlefamily home. And the world is 400,000 and what world is 400,000 square feet modest . More Living Spaces for residents sort of. They only build high end because that is where the Profit Margins margins are. Look at the bathroom. Next one. This is taken straightly from their website. Look at the bathroom. It is so rich and stark and cold at the same time. Raise your hand if anybody can afford that . Slide. Now to the real issue. The proposal for the two new windows. By the way, the proposed changes dont actually include dimensions for the two additional windows. I dont see how they can actually submit anything without dimensions. I went to the roof and i measured the openings that they have already precut. It is three and a half feet by. That is the size of two and a half a standard doors. It is not just a small window to let in sunlight. They are huge, expansive windows that operate more like an observation deck. Okay. Theres a video that illustrates the view that will come with the addition of the windows. It is a milliondollar view and i would like that but he will not live there, so why does he care . It is because it is purely a build to flip. The windows are there to maximize profit for a unit that will sell north of 5 million. Increased profits are great, right . The prophets come at a cost of the little guys in the neighborhood. Thank you. [indiscernible]. Thank you, your time is up. We may have questions for you later. Thank you. The windows that are being added here, their intended purpose is to allow sunlight in. The reason we have benches there is to keep people from sharing out there. With the addition of screening, that would also help shield any concerns regarding privacy. With regard to the finishes, we are constructing a singlefamily home project. We consider adequate parking that addresses the needs for the two homes that are there. I understand where they could view this is a 1200foot expansion to a 7,000 squarefoot expansion, but this home has been approved and we are here just for three windows. That is simply what we are requesting. Thank you very much. Commissioners . Commissioner koppel . Seeing as though the house is already built and theres no further expansion of the envelope, is there maybe any other way that either guardrails can be raised or different types of glass can be used to address these privacy issues that are valid . There is a 3foot that is why we figure contributing money , he could choose whatever form of vegetation he would like and that would be able to provide the privacy. Did you want to answer that . Yes. For the third window, adding opacity, that is a concession that would be agreeable, but when youve illustrated the approved two windows, i think at the end, that was deceptive. I even have an email from eddie just today saying that the total windows are 70 inches by 39 inches each. From your diagram, they are 8 inches by 34 or something. I dont know the dimensions. There is an email directly from eddie that shows the expansive nature of the windows that he is planning to add. Thank you. Commissioner richards . Question for the project sponsor. Can you put up the drawing that shows the media room in question and the existing condition . That is on a two. Hold on a second, please. Over here are the two benches that are about 3 feet in depth. Above them, 54 inches above the ground floor, the floor, is where the windows start. Can you show the other windows in the room on the drawing . Can you go back to the drawing you just had . Show me the other openings for light . Yes. The only other opening for light in the media room is right here. How long is that . 15 feet, 2 inches. He already have a window in there, 15 feet, 2 inches. It is only on one side. Were trying to capture the sunlight from the way the building is oriented, it is northeast, so large portion of the daylight sunshine is coming from the east and would like to be able to capture that. I was under the impression that the room was a cave, and he needed light, and you already have light coming in. Im not sure the windows are necessary. It is a this gentleman here can build an addition right over those windows if he chooses to do so. I dont think this windows are necessary there. I do like the offer of the opaqueness on the third window, but i will wait for other commissioners to weigh in. Thank you. Commissioners . Any other comments . Okay, commissioner richards . I move to take d. R. , disapprove the media room window and leave the third window, take the opaque offering that the project sponsor offered. Im not clear about the motion because the original plans already had windows, they were just smaller and higher, right . The soul substance of this d. R. Is the addition of these Property Line windows in question. There were none. Property line wall, opaque, and the additional windows are what does jonas bubbled in your plan shown as bubbled in your plan okay. What floors me is it is in addition. It should be in the original plan. Second. If nothing further, there is a motion that has been seconded to take d. R. Into. Project with the condition that the new Property Line windows proposed are eliminated, but allowing the opaque of the third window. On that motion. [roll call] that motion passes 41. Okay. We are now adjourned. I personally love the mega jobs. I think theyre a lot of fun. I like being part of a build that is bigger than myself and outlast me and make a mark on a landscape or industry. We do a lot of the big sexy jobs, the stacked towers, Transit Center, a lot of the note worthy projects. Im Second Generation construction. My dad was in it and for me it just felt right. I was about 16 when i first started drafting home plans for people and working my way through college. In college i became a project engineer on the job, replacing others who were there previously and took over for them. The Transit Center project is about a million square feet. The entire floor is for commuter buses to come in and drop off, there will be five and a half acre city park accessible to everyone. It has an amputheater and water marsh that will filter it through to use it for landscaping. Bay area council is big here in the area, and they have a gender equity group. I love going to the workshops. Its where i met jessica. We hit it off, we were both in the same field and the only two women in the same. Through that friendship did we discover that our projects are interrelated. The projects provide the power from san jose to San Francisco and end in the trans bay terminal where amanda was in charge of construction. Without her project basically i have a fancy bus stop. She has headed up the Womens Network and i do, too. We have exchanged a lot of ideas on how to get groups to work together. Its been a Good Partnership for us. Women can play leadership role in this field. I tell him that the schedule is behind, his work is crappy. He starts dropping fbombs and i say if youre going to talk to me like that, the meeting is over. So these are the challenges that we face over and over again. The reality, okay, but it is Getting Better i think. It has been great to bond with other women in the field. We lack diversity and so we have to support each other and change the culture a bit so more women see it as a great field that they can succeed in. What drew me in, i could use more of my mind than my body to get the work done. Its important for women to network with each other, especially in construction. The percentage of women and men in construction is so different. Its hard to feel a part of something and you feel alone. Its fun to play a leadership role in an important project, this is important for the transportation of the entire peninsula. To have that person of women coming into construction, returning to construction from family leave and creating the network of women that can rely on each other. Women are the main source of income in your household. Show of hands. People are very charmed with the idea of the reverse role, that theres a dad at home instead of a mom. You wont have gender equity in the office until its at home. Whatever you do, be the best you can be. Dont say i cant do it, you can excel and do whatever you want. Just put your mind into it. Good afternoon and welcome to the San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission Regular hearing for wednesday, october 22nd october 2nd, 2019. The commission does not tolerate any outbursts of any kind. Silencer mobile devices that may sound off. Do state your name for the record. I would like to take roll call at this time. [roll call] commissioners, first on your agenda is general Public Comment at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. Each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes. I have no speaker cards. Any member of the public wish to address the commission . Seeing then, close close Public Comment. Directors announcements. I want to call your attention to the new Staff Reports that we have published. Weve reformatted executive summary as well as the motion in consultation with the city attorney. You will kind of see a new packet being produced for you all. Great. Item two his review of past events of the Planning Commission. Staff report and announcements. Hang on a second, jonas. We are just trying to catch up. I wanted to tell you because i think last month i announced i would be retiring from my position at the end of february and i didnt get a chance to reach out to all of you. This is the first meeting since then. I just wanted to let you know that that is happening. The Planning Commission supports is charged with vetting candidates and presenting at least three names to the mayor for her consideration, and that process has already started. There will be plenty of time to talk about the retrospectives and everything, but i wanted to let you know how much i appreciate your support and the work that you do at this commission and everything you have done for the department over the years. I look forward to being here the next five months, and they look forward to my next phase. We will have plenty of time to talk about that in the future. Wanted to let you know how much i appreciate all your work and support. Thank you. Item two, item past reports and announcements. Seeing none, commission matters, item three, Commission Reports and announcements. I want to welcome our new commissioners. It has been a while that your seats have been vacant. We are lucky to have you. It would be good not to have to worry about coram. [laughter] thank you. Item four, consideration of Adoption Draft minutes for the regular hearing for september 18 th, 2019. I have no speaker cards. What any member of the public wish to comment on our minutes . Close Public Comment and bring it back to the commissioners. I move the minutes be adopted second. Thank you. On that motion to adopt the minutes. [roll call] so moved. That motion passes unanimously 7 0. Item five is commission comments and questions. Any comments . Very good. That will place us under your regular calendar for item six a and b. Twentysix hill street. You will consider the certificate of appropriateness and the Zoning Administrator Zoning Administrator will consider a request for a variance. Good afternoon, Commissioners Department staff. The item before you today is a request for a certificate of appropriateness for alterations to contributing building within the liberty hill landmark district located at 26 hill street. The existing threestory, three unit wood frame building was constructed in 1878. The certificate of appropriateness is being requested to correct violations to the case management, specifically for work that was completed without the benefit of a parent for beyond the scope of previously approved permits. The entire scope of work is limited to areas at the rear of the property and are not visible from the public rightofway. The enforcement history related to the property was outlined in the case report and stuff conducted multiple site visits to document the work and to ensure the certificate of appropriateness wouldve just completed work and any additional proposed work. The following scopes of work will be legalized as part of their certificate of appropriateness and will abate the opening enforcement case. Remodel and expansion of the existing ground floor unit into unconditioned space, expansion of the existing second floor unit at the northwest corner of the rear, removal, reframing, and modification of the roof of an existing portion of the building located at the rear that was originally constructed between 1950 and the mid1990s based on research. Inkind, replacement of an existing guardrail at the rear, and alterations to windows, associated trim and siding at the rear. No work is proposed for the front of the building except the sixth carriage doors facing the street of the ground floor. The other will remain an operable door to access the ground floor unit. Staff finds a proposed work conditioned is recommended will be in conformance with the requirements of article ten, with the secretary of interior standards and will be completed in a manner that is compatible with the liberty hill landmark district. The preliminary recommendation is for approval with the following conditions which can be found on page three of the case report. Upon issuance of the architectural addendum, the sponsor shall submit a construction schedule to the Planning Department and upon issuance of the architectural addendum, the project sponsor shall contact the planning Staff Members to schedule monthly visits to monitor construction progress. Staff has received no Public Comment prior to or after the distribution packets. In conjunction with a certificate of appropriateness, the work at the rear also requires a very were ruled by the Zoning Administrator for the portion completed within the required rear yard. I am available for questions. The project sponsor is also here with a brief presentation. Great. Thank you. Would five minutes be sufficient yes, five is great. Thank you. Toby morris for the project sponsor. The 26 hill project involves utilization and renovation of the three unit italian style residential structure. It is located in a tributary in the article ten lets ignite designated landmark district. The consistency had standards for the rear yard variance. The scope of the work consists of these changes. The interior renovations and expansion of the lower unit, and unconditioned space under the existing second floor. And interior renovations of the unit itself. Taking the existing carriage door at the front and the remaining access to the rear yard and modifications to the rear with new windows, trims, citing, and notably the flattening of the two shed roofs in the rear existing area. On the interior of the walls, flooring has been removed as documented in the material, meeting standards of the planning code section 1005 f. Here is a photo sorry, that is the back one. A photo of the interior. Here is a photo okay. If no visible changes are proposed, it will remain. The only proposed changes to fix one of the carriage doors so it will provide access to the rear yard. The main alteration concerns the rear. And sodas taking priority. There will be two pop outs with roofs and the rear exterior staircase to remain, an existing rear wall. Again, the demo drawings in your packet document the work and resulting in the rear elevation as proposed. This is a photo of the construction as it is done today subject to the suspension of the permit. You can see the flattened roof over the rear popout under a tarp and upper floors that were approved over under a separate permit that are not subject to this hearing. The findings where the property will continue to use a three unit structure. No changes to the existence of material and only minimal changes to Spatial Relationships of the rear. Standard two, the historic character of the property is being maintained, no changes to the facade and only minimal changes to the back. The rear will be finished and painted with windows, doors, and trim, and the floor does not apply. Standard five, all the Standard Features are being retained including the carriage doors that will remain at the rear of the renovations to the simple rear wall and are compatible with original and in keeping with San Francisco standards, a simple backyard facing wall. Standard six, seven, eight do not apply. Standard nine, no historic materials will be destroyed. The pop outs, which postdated the original victorian are proposed with flat roofs. No change in the future. Number ten does not apply. So now address the Zoning Administrator and the various findings, a one, the professional circumstances. The property has two pop outs that are existing and nonconforming. Enforcement is 134 and one section section 38 would not allow for densification. These pop outs decide the fact that we are moving the roofs and constructing flat roofs and it will have minimal bearing on the construction site. Next slide. Such a varied suggest the preservation of rights enjoyed by others in the vicinity and other nearby properties. They have larger encroaching rear yard structures. This will have no impact with Public Welfare or the general plan. That concludes my presentation. Thank you for that. Thank you. Good job. We will take Public Comment. Does any member of the public wish to comment on this item . Close Public Comment and bring it back to the commission. And he questions . I moved to approve with the conditions. Second. Thank you, commissioners. On that motion to approve this matter with conditions. [roll call] so moved. That motion passes unanimously 7 0. Zoning administrator, what say you . Close a public hearing for the variance and approve the grant with the standard conditions. That will place us on item seven a and b. You would consider the certificate of appropriateness and the Zoning Administrator will consider the request for variance. Good afternoon, commissioners i am with the Planning Department staff. The application before you is a request for a certificate of appropriateness and variance for the property at 3733, 373,520 th street was a contributor to the liberty hill landmark district designated under article ten of the planning code. The subject property is occupied by a two story two family residence joined in an east lake construction 1880 per the project includes construction of a garage within the front setback area and additional habitable space under the existing building. The garage will have a woodpaneled door and the new addition will be topped with a metal guard rail, a deck, and a new standard to maintain existing pattern of landscaped, front back areas along the subject block space. On the east facade, new wood and aluminum clad wood windows are proposed. The project was presented before the review committee on november 7th, 2018. The proposal has been revised to address the recommendations provided by the a. R. C. , which in summary, include minimization of the garage structure, to mimic the existing retaining wall, retention of the existing terrace setback pattern, retention or reconstruction of the existing historic concrete entry stairs and modification of the proposed deck guardrail to include vertical balusters. A copy of the meeting notes and stuff analysis is included in your packet. The project sponsor is also seeking a variance from the front setback requirements under section 132 of the planning code in addition to the letter of opposition you received this morning, the department has received one letter of support for the project from the neighbor who asserts the proposal maintains the historic integrity of the property. I have a copy of this letter for your records. Given the unique topography of the subject block in the subject parcel, the existing pattern of front setback garages, in the project sponsors response to the comments of the a. R. C. , staff is determine the proposed work will be in conformance with the requirements outlined in article ten of the planning code and the secretary of the interior standards. Based on the analysis found in the case report, staff recommends approval with the following conditions. First, that prior to approval of the building permit, the project sponsor shall provide final material samples of the pigmented smooth cement plaster garage cladding and the metal guardrail to Department Staff or review and approval. Second, that prior to approval of the building permit, the project sponsor shall provide material specifications and product cut sheets for any proposed windows and doors to Department Staff for review and approval, and third, that prior to approval of the building permit, the project sponsor shall provide detailed drawings and or project specifications for the proposed entry gate to Department Staff for review and approval. A fourth condition has been formulated in response to Public Inquiry about the proposed curb cuts since the packets were published. It will be included in an amended draft motion. This condition requires that prior to the approval of the building permits, the project sponsor shall continue to work with Department Staff on the location and details of the proposed curb cut and garage door. This concludes my presentation. I have copies of working plans and elevations that were prepared by the project sponsor in response to public opposition for your reference and those were just distributed to you. The sponsor is also in attendance and will make a short presentation. Im happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. Thank you. Would five minutes be sufficient yes. Thank you. Good afternoon. Thank you for hearing our case. I think that monica brought you up to date on this relevant point. I wanted to also point out that my clients are here with one of their two boys, they approached me two years ago about constructing a garage for them, which is very much in need for their growing family, and it does happen to be the neighborhood precedent. You can see here their house is the subject property and the neighborhood pattern is predominantly garages. We did look initially at the idea of having the garage said further back from the street, but it was not feasible to do that, both in terms of the difficulty of construction and engineering, so we decided to pull it out to the street. As monica described, we made quite a few changes in order to satisfy the Architectural Review Committee in november of last year. This is just a site mac a site map of the block that shows and purple the houses that have garages, so it is very clearly the neighborhood pattern. Here is my favorite photo that shows the reality of living in a house where you have to climb up both a set of stairs to get to your front door and another set of stairs to get up to the unit when there is no garage. The things that typically live in a garage tend to get destroyed put in this stairs. I have some concerns, but that is also a bit of a code violation in terms of egress. My clients are very much eager for the garage and we have made a lot of compromises to our original plan to get to the point where we think it satisfies both that there needs, as well as that of the neighborhood. I also want to point out that the proposed garage does have some living space behind it, which they very much want to use for their own purposes, and there was a point where we considered converting that space into an accessory dwelling units because my clients very much wanted to try to provide additional housing if that worked out. Unfortunately, it was a bit of a dead end because it requires that we had to get an exposure variance and that seems like an uphill battle that couldnt easily be attained. Most recently, this past friday, we did hear from someone in the neighborhood that did have concerns about the impact of our project on on Street Parking. This is something that we took very seriously. My clients understand that on Street Parking is a challenge in the neighborhood, and so we went back to the drawing board and looked at options as to how we might be able to make some further design revisions to accommodate that. You can see here in the site plan, this is what exists currently, and this is what we have been approved for. With the curb cut centred on the garage door, pretty much falling equally between two street trees that have been there for a long time. When we looked at various options, we figured out we could make some internal changes in the garage and slide both the garage door and the curb cut further to the west and we could open up what would be a 12foot long space, which is modest in size, but it could accommodate a small car and would be better than having the curb cut be directly between the two street trees, and elevation, this is what we are approved for, and you can see the garage door as it aligns, and then with the revised plan, quickly. With the revised plan, use we slid the garage door over and have created a 12foot space. One thing that we are up against is a street tree that exists on the west, directly to the west side of the property. Therefore we couldnt move the curb cut and the garage door any further to get more than a 12 foot space. That might be a reasonable compromise to consider. Thank you. Thank you. We will go ahead and take Public Comment. Would any member of the public wish to comment on this item . Heidi klein. My apologies. Okay. Hello. I am a 25 year resident who lives in the neighborhood. I live in Affordable Housing and i use on Street Parking. I cant believe planning is actually recommending approval of a new garage in the mission, and one of the densest neighborhood, and right next to dolores park. In total contradiction with the mayors and citywide programs to make our streets safer. Vision zero transit first. The new garage is right up on the sidewalk so the curb comes out right in front of thousands of people that are going to dolores park. Some of the distracted people with their children pushing a stroller, et cetera, going to the park doesnt see the car parking and we know what happens this happens to me every day when i walk up the street. Planning has four policy documents on garages and on Street Parking. One, the Mission Street scape for the design plan that this was especially street that was earmarked to add on Street Parking and not removing it like is being proposed. The project doesnt comply with the other three. Guidelines to adding garages, residential goes assigned guidelines in the code itself. And the department own Residential Design Team is not supportive of new garages for homes without them because it replaces a public space with a private one and decreases pedestrian safety. Yet despite all this, here we are. Were mitigating impact but using the same design as other buildings on the block. Garage on one side and stairs on the other like the last one. Then only one on Street Parking space is being removed instead of two. And you can co mingle with one of the existing neighbors, plus the owner is unwilling to give up their favorite street tree. Instead, they want their two car garage, exercise, media rooms, wine storage and control of all other 25 feet of street frontage so no one else can park. The proverbial, i want to have my cake and eat it too. The 12foot on Street Parking space is just a ruse. As m. T. A. It will read curb anything less than 14. An important overlook issue here is privatization of a public resource. It is an important resource for people in Affordable Housing, as well as daytime workers in this racially and economically diverse neighborhood. Its removal is not discussing anywhere, not on the plans, the public mood or staff report. This is a systemic practice that needs to be corrected to continue San Franciscos future as an economic place to live and work. Please take a giant step forward towards correcting this inequality by requiring the inclusion of the removal of on Street Parking in your reviews, public notices, and showing it on the plans for all future projects. I urge you to deny this project as an inconvenient process with the established street pardons on the block as well as at least six city policy programs. And they clearly have received a variance ten years ago for the rear yard, so not only have they your time is up. Thank you. Any other members of the public . Closed Public Comment and bring it back to the commission. Commissioner pearlman . Thank you. I was on the a. R. C. And saw this project when it came through before. I was someone who made the comment about the front railing being vertical instead of horizontal. I look at the drawings. It is still horizontal despite what staff has said. I just want to get some clarity if that railing will be vertically oriented. Thank you. Yes, it will. You did not update the their elevation to show that. I wanted to be sure that it was honored. I agree. We have been through a lot of iterations. I apologize. For sure, that can be a condition of approval, absolutely. Okay. That is it. Do we have a motion . I move we approved with conditions. Including yes. Including the conditions to have the staff asking to review the details as part of the commission. We dont have to add it. It will be amended in the draft motion. Thank you. There is a motion that has been seconded to approve this matter with conditions with the amendments read into the record by staff. On that motion. So moved. That motion passes unanimously 7 0. Zoning administrator, what say you . Close the public hearing on the variance. In light of the Public Comment, referencing specific provisions, i want to go back and do do diligence and look over the specific revisions and take this under advisement. Very good. That will place us on item eight this is a certificate of appropriateness. Good afternoon, commissioners the application before you is a request for a certificate of appropriateness for the property at 804 to 86,202nd street. The contributor to the dogpatch landmark district designated under article ten of the code and located within it an m. C. Two zoning district. The property has improved with a two story, two family wood frame building constructed in 1895 in the classical revival style of the ground floor. The proposal includes a groundfloor horizontal addition at the rear to encompass the full depth of the lot, which is permitted for commercial uses in the n. C. T. Two zoning district. The commercial storefront will also be restored. The onestory vertical addition and three new decks with cable guard rails including one overlooking 20th street, are also proposed. New solar panels will be installed at the roof. The vertical edition will be minimally visible from public rightsofway at 20th street and tennessee street. The department has received one Public Inquiry in one letter from a Community Group in opposition to the project and a summary of this opposition has been included in your packets. The department has received two letters of support since your packets were published and i have copies of those letters for your reference which were just distributed. These letters state the project is in keeping with the dynamic quality of the dogpatch neighborhood and that construction will not be disruptive to neighbors including the adjacent Saint Stephens baptist church. Given the limited visibility of the rooftop features, the setback provided from 20th street and the compatible materials and scale of the vertical edition on a block comprised of three story buildings, staff has determined the proposed work will be in conformance with the requirements outlined in article ten of the planning code and the secretary of the interior standards. Based on the analysis found in the case report, staff recommends approval with the following conditions. That prior to the issuance of the building permits, the sponsor will submit product information such as cut sheep or cut sheep or drawings for the double hung wood windows and storefront windows and commercial storefront entry for review and approval by Planning Department staff. This concludes my presentation. The project sponsor is also in attendance and will make a short presentation. Im happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Would five minutes spee sufficient . Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners i am architect for the project. What we are doing here, proposing to do is to add a new third