About is in fact on the ground floor. This is it here. It has a fullsized bath and walk in closet, fullsize appliances in the kitchen and its own private courtyard entry and gate as he mentioned. I can answer Additional Details about that in comments, but thats in the project now. The main house is in the second and third floor, the a. D. U. Is on the ground. The biggest thing theres been a lot of misinformation flying around about the shadow study. But suffice it to say in the summer months, you can see the existing on top and the proposed at the bottom. In the summer months, essentially, theres no change because the sun is so high in the sky. In the winter months, the opposite is true. The sun is so low that no sun penetration gets to the wall on 15 vasquez. Its important to note that the north, the east, and the south walls are not affected by our projects. What i studied the last three months are the period of time between the answer and the winter, that would be the he can whi can equinox. Of the hours of daylight in San Francisco, 1500 hours touched 15 vasquez on the west wall. But when i got into the granular aspects of it, and started setting the windows at 15 vasquez, i found that there are only 86 hours in the year where the direct sun is adversely affected in the windows on the west side. Thats 86 hours out of 1500. Thats less than 5 . So in in the process, why is that number so low . It surprised me, as well, and the reason is, you have to understand the section and ive given you a smaller one to look at. The section of existing. You can see the existing house is 258, and the new house is 378. Thats why the solar studies between the two houses are marginal. So in conclusion, id like to give some time to the homeowners to speak, but this is currently a 1300 square foot two bedroom singlefamily that we would like to build two units, four bedrooms, and seismically upgraded drainage handles that are efficient. Vice president koppel okay. I have some speaker cards for Public Comment. Im going to list all the names, so please come up in any order. Excuse me . [inaudible] Vice President koppel okay. Whats your name, miss . [inaudible] Vice President koppel kathleen darby. Okay. Im going to read off a list of names. Kathleen darby, john nolte, michael nolte, peter milke, kevin and darren flynn, commissioner michael antonini, and robert kozelski. Please come up and lineup on the screen side of the room. Thank you. My name is kathy darby. Good afternoon. My name is kathy darby. I am i passed some packets we passed some packets to jonas. Its the same material that was sent to you in an email yesterday. I live at 215 vasquez, and i live next door to the house thats planned at 225, and that house is identical to our house, and its a very sound house. Its old and hasnt been updated, but its a sound, live i cant believe house. Id expected its a sound, liveable house. Id expected to come here today, expecting to hear about your decision on the project, but as i looked at the packet on the Planning Commission website, i see that theyve been changed again. Notably, the project has gotten bigger clerk okay, maam, unfortunately your time is up. Really . Did i take three minutes . Clerk one minute. Its the second time hearing this project. Id just like to say that if you clerk maam, unfortunately your time is up. Everyones getting one minute. Vice president koppel we may have questions for you later. We have to give everyone the same amount of time. We may have questions for you late later. Next speaker, please. Im karen, and this is devon flynn. We live at 265 vasquez. Im speaking for us both. Our concern is that the project is really large compared to everything else, and although thats not something that probably can be adjudicated, that it does cut down on sun light is an extreme concern of ours, and it is not in keeping with the neighborhood, and we hope that you do not support the project as it currently stands as it is even increased in size as it was increased in size from the previous hearing where we all attended. Thanks. Vice president koppel thank you. Next speaker, please. Im gary. I live at 255 vasquez. Ive lived there for 30 years. I live in about 1300 square feet. Theres a reason why i moved in this neighborhood. Its because its integrally nice neighborhood, and i think its this is how i a neighborhood should look like. And i really think that this build is too big, the other proportion is not needed, and theres a reason it should not be built, and i think the sun light survey is wrong. Vice president koppel thank you. Next speaker, please. Im going to call out alina and kate. Mike antonini. I agree. Currently the amount of light getting to 215 is around 1500 sun light hours in the afternoon, but i based my findings on the earlier sun studies than the one theyre trying to put forward now. And in that study, we lost 1,000 hours of sun to 215 vasquez. Bottom line, i question those. I think theres a lot of light to 200215 vasquez. Take a little bit away from the dining room height to bring the thing down to 31 feet net height. Which will eliminate a lot of the problems, so i think that is probably what were asking. Were not opposing the project entirely, but i think it has to be appropriate. The living room has to be shorter. Its almost 35 feet along. Knock it down to five more feet, so were going to have a set back of 15 feet from the street, which is appropriate. Clerk thank you, sir. Vice president koppel thank you. Next speaker, please. [please stand by] i live across the street from the house. It is not true that our house is all small. Our houses over house is over 2200 square feet. It is not true. I live across the street from [indiscernible] i know i live in a old house. Some people say it is a sound house, it is not true. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. I lived at 215 vasquez and my parents on the house from 1953 to 1980. The house is at 1145 garcia. It was owned at the time by educators. Element the development will harm this is the porch. This area here, and there are all of these windows appear on this side, and also the backyard that my father built. By the way, there were five family members. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Overhead . My name is michael nolte. My family owned the property before the previous owner of 215 vasquez. I have actual history of what they should be doing and not doing when there is a new gigantic building being built next to it. I find it ironic. And neighbors basically say a lot about the property but they dont understand the issue of sun and light and i want to point out that when the building was put up for sale at 225 van ness, basically the realtors say it is a fixerupper. They dont understand the codes. They come in and go to the Planning Commission and expect them to make these changes. So that is the kind of problem we are up against when people move into a neighborhood. Thank you. One more speaker card. Hello. I used to live on 17th avenue. I also walk in the neighborhood and i love the architecture of this neighborhood because it speaks a lot about the culture and the history of the neighborhood. People have lived there for 30 or 40 years and it has meaning. Thank you. Next speaker, please. I live at 215 vasquez. The Planning Commission meeting on march 7th, commissioner hillis requested that you work with the project sponsor on the plans, presumably the issues raised by the neighbors. Unfortunately, nothing has happened. The department has not been in touch with us and when he was asked about switching the side, he said it would offend his personal sensitivities. Thank you. Anymore members of the public who wish to comment on this item seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioners . Definitely an appeal case. The orientation drives a lot of the comments that they brought forward. There is no doubt that the new building is taking the west of the existing appellant building. There is going to be a lot of shadow there. The question is how much. However, i was not quite satisfied with the permit holders approached in this. They could have easily given up some the height and the upper living floor between dining and the living room could easily have dropped some. Similarly, the setback could have been handled a little bit better. Maybe not as much is what the adjacent neighbors want to, but i would have expected this be in San Francisco because they would have been some movement there. We didnt see any. Commissioner richards . I have a few issues with this i think commissioner moore said sometimes it is 20 pounds and a 10pound bag. I have been looking at that here i think the unit size in relationship to the a. D. U. Is gargantuan. When you look at how the a. D. U. Is laid out here, you can even see a kitchen. If i am wrong, correct me, it looks like it can be easily subsumed as a house because you have your entry door, you have the hallway door and then you go up the steps to the house. It doesnt read like a true a. D. U. It is not connected interior to the house by any kind of door or anything. I dont like the project the way it is. I think the a. D. U. Needs to be much more drawn out. I think the commissioners suggestions around making the 27 pounds is a good idea. I could approve a larger a. D. U. That reads as an a. D. U. And a lot of the things that the former commissioner had mentioned. Is that a motion . We need to be specific on that. Or i could actually direct well, it is not a motion. Commissioner hillis . Can i ask the architecture can i ask the architect . I am not seeing it the same way that you are, commissioner richards. There is a separate entrance. It is kind of built into the ground floor. Can you show the floorplan floor plan at the garage level . Overhead . Pull over the microphone. Just to give you the layout a more detail, the entrance to the main house comes from the extra stair. The entrance to the a. D. U. Is through a gate here. It is a private space for the entry. This entire wall is kitchen. This glass this bath is a full bath with the window and the walkin closet. What whats behind it . At this at that point, youre 10 feet below grade. We have a light well we are using. I think it is really important. For 11 years, i have lived in north beach. It had windows on three sides, which gives you a sense of autonomy. When we do a second unit, that is the key to making it livable. I get it is not huge, but i dont see this as a real great way to make that bigger. They need to excavate further in regard to that, can you show the size of the building . I think this is where your issue is. Can you show what it was before and what modifications you made . I thank you loom large on the streets. You are an architect, you were trying to make it look good. I dont have a general problem with the design, but it looks bigger than it is and you are not making a nod over 20 years of working in San Francisco, we have learned how to make this on the inside and the outside. The changes that we made from the beginning our extensive. Between then and now, it is easier to see it here. There is some penetration to reduce the impact of this massing. This is key. Originally we were not asking to demo the project. We were just looking at a new floor. If we did that, we ended up with a house. The existing top floor of the house is at 22 feet. When you added on this, this is how we went through the living room. We push the ground floor down to eight. We took the bedrooms that were currently at the main level and then we have this space left over. We did the studies to make sure we were not adversely affecting it more then the 5 . I was surprised it was 5 . It was carefully because we were doing a section profile to allow late summer across the Northeast Corner and to go out at that cut out at the back. It was a very specifically could you show the facade did you make any changes since the last time you were here . We pushed around the light and the windows at this corner. I adjusted this and pushed it back, the overhang, which is the rain cover for the deck. Mostly the work is on the a. D. U. , and then i spent dozens of hours running the floor way test. I did adjust a few on that but we had done that prior to the previous meeting where we had steps back in that corner. And again, lowering the back of the house to ensure the last time we came in. I am not increasing the size of the project. Do you have a photo of it . Excuse me, but you are out of order. Can you show the facade from the last time you were here . You should get it we will wait until you get there on the ground. [indiscernible] you can see there was a little it was a little bit more squared off here. I cut back and made it the way this house works is a vertical modulation. This is one block, this is the other block, breaking the two vertically. I have not changed the size of the floor, otherwise to work on the a. D. U. I have four different projects that were much larger can you put this up . This is what i was looking at. I dont know what iteration of the project. This reads on the street a little less bulky. You mean the other image . If you are standing across the street and looking at it directly. You can see that the highest point of our house is no higher then the neighbor to the east. We use that as is it set back from the east Property Line here . Where that deck wraps around that you dont have . We have set back 7 feet, 10 feet here, i cant really recall. Nothing has changed. From the side Property Line, not from the street. We have not made the project wider or deeper. Can you put the new facade up adjacent to that . Just push that up a little. [indiscernible] just to the side here you can see the corner of okay. It is very carefully proportioned and laid out so that it squeezes down the bottom of two floors. That freedom at the top, in opposition to the two positions, i think it balances nicely in this project. Thank you. Commissioner richards . On the other hand, are you sure that is something that wasnt on my plan in terms of what the a. D. U. Entry was . It is a solid wall further behind. My a. D. U. Door looks like it is in an interior hallway. Can you walk us through that . This is not an a. D. U. Previously we had submitted the project as singlefamily because we did not have the new legislature. That is the singlefamily version. That is correct. Okay. We drew that out. Is the a. D. U. Plan in my packet . I think im looking at the wrong thing. Actually, i should amend what i said previously. We did add to the a. D. U. , but thats entirely it makes sense. Thank you. Commissioner moore . I dont agree with commissioner hillis observation it is an a. D. U. By design. It is a nice unit, it is small, but i do not see any need to manifest your desire that it doesnt fit the design. I cannot support that. The building is large, and for that reason, i would feel quite comfortable with the way it is right now. Is that a motion . Commissioner hillis . We have seen these before where you are trying to add onto the building and get the same results. The designs tend to suffer because of it. It looks a little large on the street. I guess some of the neighbors are concerned. It is a big lot. There is a sizable home as well as smaller ones on the street. I think tweaking this with setbacks here or there is going to make any substantial change or difference. I moved to approve. Second. If theres nothing further, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this matter with conditions. On that motion. Omac [roll call] that motion fails 32. Commissioner moore . I will ask for a continuance since we are two commissioners short. We will not find a solution to this today. Second. Any specific date in mind . I dont have a calendar in front of me. I would have to rely on your recommendation and do it as quickly as possible when we have a full commission. I mean, there is nothing soon where there is a full commission the soonest we could schedule it would be august 29th, but some of the items have been continue to that. You have a very long calendar after that and it is september 19th. Excuse me, may i mentioned, we have been dealing with this for two and a half years. We have done everything we could to design this project. Honestly, i like density equity, but the size of the house, i dont care how well the a. D. U. Is designed, i truly dont believe it will be rented out. It is a four or 5 milliondollar house that you will not need to the income from. It will sit there empty. That is why i do not support this project. Im sorry. It should be 1200 square feet, it should make Financial Sense to rented out, not a micro a. D. U. Im sorry. That is why i am not in support of this project no matter how welldesigned. I agree with you, but the answer to that is we have an r. H. One zoning that we are going to allow the a. D. U. You dont want the state to come and tell us we can put two units in it. You cant have it both ways. It is in our h. One in zoning, it is a big lot, we are doing what they asked us to do. I am with you, lets make it r. H. Four so people can put four units in. But we are wanting our cake and eating it, too. Further to this, even if someone builds an a. D. U. , we cannot control it. That is not in our purview. Im not trying to make it in our purview. The question i have is, what is the maximum size and a. D. U. Can be based on a be 22 . Is there a state maximum . It is our h. One, i get it. Can we have two units that are 1800 square feet . Call one and a. D. U. And won a unit. Can we have a 1200 squarefoot a. D. U. Any 2700 squarefoot house. Commissioner richards, i dont have all that data with me , so i cant give you an answer based on the numbers, im sorry. I dont know if staff has those numbers. Unfortunately, we dont know those answers. Okay. I support the continuance. The a. D. U. Is not my issue. The issue is the bulk of the building. I would raise this to the project sponsor. If we limited the top floor to a maximum of 12 feet, the setback of the living room could increase from 7. 5 to 10 feet. Would that be acceptable . [indiscernible] behind the houses excuse me, i raise the question. I dont want to hear any more discussion on your reasons. The answer your to your question would be we are okay with increasing the height of our living room because we have pushed down the whole house to be able to have a beautiful living room. We have bought this land because we wanted to have the oceanview. If we push back anymore, it almost defeats the purpose of our project, which would have been happening for two and a half years and we have already thank you, i understand. The view is from the floor line, it is not from the top. [indiscernible] it would bring approval today if there was more height . Would it change your vote today . Would that be a quorum for approval today . Lets put it up for a vote. 10 feet instead of the maximum clear space within the top floor would be 1 setback on the living room floor would go from 7. 5 to 1