Appellants request, including removal of roof deck and privacy including nonoperable frosted grass windows and privacy screen. With these modifications added, there is no impact on the privacy to the rear yard of appellants home. This is the sensitively designed, smallscale Development Needed for the west side of town to do its part to address the housing crisis the Planning Commission saw that and unanimously approved it. It meets all criteria of 317 for approval of demolition and replacement. The project was before the Planning Commission because 317 requires conditional approval for demolition. Joe purchased the house in 2015 from the estate of the former owner, who owneroccupied until his death in 2014. Its been vacant since of the Planning Commission found that there was all the relevant data. It is not subject to rent control and no tenants were or are being replaced. It replaces one unit with three and three bedrooms with eight bedrooms. It closely conforms to rm1 zoning and the
Improvement on the housing shortage in San Francisco. I believe that what we need is more affordable rental housing, more than luxury housing. In any event, more modestly sized structure would be a great improvement for the other residents in the neighborhood. Finally, i just ask the board to please consider the potential negative impacts on quality of life that the development as proposed will have on the neighbors. Thank you. Councillor breed thank you for your comments. Knee. Speaker, please . Hello. Im john mulligan, owner of 210 27th avenue. Youve heard it all already. The building is too high and the air and light. My tenants, its rentcontrolled, many are distraught about this and they cant afford to move. You really have to take a look at this about the people its affecting, not the greedy developers. Thank you. Councillor breed thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Sophie stevenson and i live at 210 27th avenue. And im very concerned about the lack of light that il
Our project has been described as massive, monolithic and out of character with its neighbors as an anomaly in an area dominated by smaller buildings. The facts dont bear this out. The diagram indicates in red the 4th stories of a large number of existing buildings in both the contiguous and surrounding blocks. The vast majority of these buildings contain four stories that represent 100 of their overall footprints with no setbacks at all. The appellants 2story building is indicated in yellow and you can see theres a partial 4th floor on the building next door to his building to the east. To the west, the corner building at lake and 27th avenue is 3 stories. But as steve mentioned, its capped by a roof ands that large floortofloor heights bringing the Building Height up to 37 feet. This is 3 feet below our proposed roof line. This is not atypical at all for the block, as many older buildings of 3 stories are in the range of 35 to 37 feet. A proposed 4th level is shown in blue behind the
Approval of demolition and replacement. The project was before the Planning Commission because 317 requires conditional approval for demolition. Joe purchased the house in 2015 from the estate of the former owner, who owneroccupied until his death in 2014. Its been vacant since of the Planning Commission found that there was all the relevant data. It is not subject to rent control and no tenants were or are being replaced. It replaces one unit with three and three bedrooms with eight bedrooms. It closely conforms to rm1 zoning and the period urban design. Appellants did not oppose demolition at the Planning Commission or here. They presented no evidence that the Planning Commission approved its description in approving demolition. What appellants are seeking is removal of the 4th floor, which would eliminate a familysize limit in violation of the housing act and the owners plan. They got everything they asked for except that 4th floor being eliminated. The Planning Department realized
As massive, monolithic and out of character with its neighbors as an anomaly in an area dominated by smaller buildings. The facts dont bear this out. The diagram indicates in red the 4th stories of a large number of existing buildings in both the contiguous and surrounding blocks. The vast majority of these buildings contain four stories that represent 100 of their overall footprints with no setbacks at all. The appellants 2story building is indicated in yellow and you can see theres a partial 4th floor on the building next door to his building to the east. To the west, the corner building at lake and 27th avenue is 3 stories. But as steve mentioned, its capped by a roof ands that large floortofloor heights bringing the Building Height up to 37 feet. This is 3 feet below our proposed roof line. This is not atypical at all for the block, as many older buildings of 3 stories are in the range of 35 to 37 feet. A proposed 4th level is shown in blue behind the appellants building, which is