The owners cousin. I believe that the upper unit is currently occupied by friends of the owner and they will move out when the time comes and no evictions necessary to do this work. Its my understanding he intends to use this as a pietta tare. They claim this is out of scale with the neighborhood and that the additional block will cast unreasonable shadows on neighbours since there are no others fronting winter place. I think this is erroneous. There are no other buildings fronting winter place, half of the buildings on this block are four stories tall and many of them actually front or rear, shall we say, as opposed to winter place. They front on union street or mason street and theres more buildings that are fourstories tall than the ones that arent. I think we have incomplete, erroneous information. 13 of the 26 buildings on the block talking about the block, its half a block pointed by mason an august alley. 13 are four stories and the midblock open space is inconsistent at best and all of the buildings fronted on union street, which back up to union place have to rear yards and that the common standard of this block. 50 is by the oversized lot. It should be noted that the three dr requesters are 50 feet away from my building and impossible to block their light in error. I find the view issue a little bit erroneous because theyre above us and 65 feet away. The proposed addition will increase some shadows in a small amount of time on august alley on limited number of days but we should look at what the condition of the property is. Its a strange lot, kind of a flagged lot with primary building built 100 in the setback and has been there a long time surround bid three and fourstory buildings. We found out there are concerns about privacy from our building to that building and one of the reasons they asked us to remove this deck and we are not infilling the light but recovering the light with our new addition and did propose a deck and happy to remove it. Happy to also change the siding of the building. I dont think that the impact of new shadows or loss of light in error to this property are libertlegitimate reasons for th. We think they dont like change. We have a study available in 2d and a 3d video that shows the shadow impact, if necessary to look at that. Finally, this issue of loss of privacy came up last week and we find that to be when you look at the situation, its a bit silly. This is a view from our current roof which is the height of our addition, looking down into the building, where mitzie complained about our eigh abilio look into her bedroom and i can see with the landscaping, this is impossible to see in those windows. Its impossible to see in those windows from the current Property Line windows. Her concerns about privacy are also a little bit kind of strange when you look at the fourstory Apartment Building next to her with windows and decks her property. We agree to remove the proposed balcony and have given these image and what i consider to be sort of a conceptual loss of privacy versus actual to think the request to raise the sill height to 56 is unnecessary. We would propose we raise them to 36, a little less access to her yard which doesnt matter and does continue the pattern of windows on this side of our building. We believe that this is a codecompliant project. The variance, if we were to be requested to be code compliant, if you look at this building here, we have about six feet of building as we say over the existing footprint and if we were to remove that, this line right here is still about two feet into the rear setbacks and we would have to come to a line right here to be code compliant, structurally ill logical. If you think about the impact of this from the green street requesters, given the site lines from their buildings, theres really zero change of impact. They want to to remove the third floor which means we have no project. The residential guidelines, they were looking at things that had projects that were front yard, rear yard and we clearly have a different situation. Her yard to east is fronting a different street, a lot not normal 25 feet with an existing nonconforming cottage in the rear yard and we dont believe the guidelines are the same way we have, which is side by side. Theres a reason that the Design Guidelines were not applied in the way hes asking. We think we have a project even with a variance makes sense and that we understand this are issues around these fourth floors, but when one looks at the situation here, the impact of winter place is zero and the impact to the midblock open space, if we can go back to one of the images that shows the whole block, were still one of the smallest buildings on the block. Theres already 13 of 26 buildings on that block are four stories. So im not not sure how our addition, they claim its a 1,000foot addition, its not. Its 620 feet. I believe theres a lot of misinformation and untruths that have been stated by the dr requesters and their attorney. When you look at the facts, we have an approvable project and would encourage you to do so. Thank you. Do we have any Public Comment in support of the project sponsor. Public comment is closed. Dr requesters, you get a twominute rebuttal and you get four. Thank you. Steve williams again. If they have a codecompliant project, why on earth didnt they propose it . Its not what is before you and its not a code compliant project as a variance. Its not visible from winter place because winter place is 1e a picture of the building. You cant see anything. But its visible from everywhere else and will be incredibly visible from mitzies house and here is the view, if i can have the overhead again, on page 9 of my brief. They put up the story poles. You can see this is looking over mitzies property. She has a fence in front, the garden, looking over it towards the building, looking due west from august alley, this picket e was taken. This is visible from every section of august alley. Mitzies august supplies all of the midblock open space. I mean, thats a fact. This is her property here. She has a onestory garage with a bedroom in the front and a onestory living room and culture in the back. Culturkitchen in the back. Its a famous site. I attached an article from 2004 as an exhibit. It has historic value. I think that the department missed the boat on the historic value of the subject property and that will property be a part of the challenge if this goes further because it was built by capeudo, one of the Founding Fathers of north beach and ive been told they have a sequa problem. He lived in that cottage, by the way. Therewhy does that need to be dramatically expanded to the detriment of the neighbors . That violates numerous code sections. No explanation for the web lists on hotpads. Com or the shortterm rental. Isnt covering a light well the same as filling it in . If you block all light from the top and getting to your neighbor, block every bit of available light that used to come through the light well, isnt that the same as filling it in . Talk about splitting hairs. The architect said that the residential Design Guidelines dont apply to buildings that are side by side. I dont knee wha know what that. Yes, i its a deadend alley but these buildings sit adjacent, side by side. And theres no admonition in any part of the residential Design Guidelines that say they should not be a applied to this situation because they should. Theyre asking you to put an unarticulated fourstory building next to a onestory cot cottage. Thats what the request is here. They already loom over mitzies cottage and thats obvious from the photos you look at. You can see the shadows in those photographphotographs. Shell lose the on light she gets to her deck. Her deck is on the east side of the building in the back there and there it is right there and the only direct sunlight comes right over the top of that building. And we sat there and timed it. Shell lose two hours of direct sunlight to that deck. Finally, the project is close to 1,000 square feet because theyve neglected to mention that theyre adding 360 new square feet of conditioned space in the basement. If theyre dying for more Square Footage, it could be captured there. The parking could be eliminated, bedroom could be put down there. As they said, theres a giant dark room thats built in the basement. So thats about 1,000 square feet of new conditioned space. Thank you very much. Please reject this project. Thank you. We will now hear rebuttal from the other two remaining dr requesters. Very briefly. I think youve heard misleading statements from the other side. I just wanted to go back to the scale of this and youve heard how its in keeping with the rest of the block and counting up buildings on the block. I want to go back again and say were talking about winter place and we have not heard anything about any other building on winter place for the fourth floor. And youve been told that, well, buildings kind of front on to winter place from union. Well, they front on union and they back up to winter place. Some of those are four floors. But union is downhill from winter place. So am that. This wont tower over winter place. So i think that one is really misleading and the other thing i wanted to address is the shadow on mitzies yard. Showing pictures of foilage saying there you are, no problem, she does have windows there, so thats misleading. Now and the other thing is, pointing to that building to the south of her on august alley saying, well, look, she has to privacy, to life, this is a great big building there. Somehow that gives them the right to further destroy her privacy and her shadow and that doesnt seem right. I dont know the exact Building Code or the planning code but doesnt seem right because you have a bad neighbor on one side, you should just live with a bad neighbor on the other side. Thats it. Please stop this project. Thank you. Thank you. We will hear rebuttal from the remaining dr requester, please . You pass, ok. So thats it. Project sponsor. Im sorry, go ahead. Im rich samson. Youve been a resident for 25, 30 years and this has been my resident for 18 or 20 years. I did move out when my son was born so that we had more space, only a onebedroom unit. As far as hotpads, youve never rented my place on hotpads, air bnb. I have my son 50 of the time and rest of the time im in north beach. My office is at grant and green. I park in front of my house every single day. And for many years, i would sleep there, 50 of the nights of the week. So all of this is a fallacy. Secondly, its a fourstory, a very small unit, as big as this area, 600 square feet. Im trying to have a second room to have my son in the city. We both want to get back to the city. So the other dr people are, i think, 60 or 70 feet away and this air, light and space seems to be a complete fallacy. Mitzies property is surrounded by many and her place is covered to foilage. My second floor unit, the reality is, you dont look down, you look at the view. So i think a lot of these arguments are fallacies. The fact that varanes street, that was used by the attorney, is on Telegraph Hill and my property is on russian hill. You cant count because its not three blocks but five or six blocks. Thank you very much. Thank you. I just want to follow up you have 22 seconds. Thats fine. The overhead, please. There whole issue of the four stories on winter place, yes, these buildings front on the other street, but this is a fourstory building on winter place, and this is a fourstory building with a corner on winter place and two other buildings with a corner on winter place. Ok, thank you. Commissioner more. Let me ask mr. Winc wince winsle drawings by the architect dont match. I have two packages. I have a package that was reinserted into this weeks package. Its should be dated september 5th, but those two packages are identical. However, what was presented a few minutes ago seems to be something es. Ael. Else. Am i missing something . I simply added the drawings to the packages by the deadline that i needed to publish them. If he presented something today that was different, which i believe was a varient that avoided a variance, that is not in your packet. Ok, thank you for saying that. In our june meeting, there were comments made or i made them to myself that the package submitted now and then is completely irrelevant to the type of information we have to understand better what is going on. Its very difficult to understand the context in which this building is happening. Its a three dimensional in all directions, so theres no 3d in this package, nor any description of materials. I see the Department Taking on the horizona horizon siding. So none of that has been addressed. I am having a difficult time accepting the presentation that was just made a few minutes ago, as something to be considering in my deliberations because none of the material was given to us and was incomplete. The guidelines where quite clear of what this commission is expecting and we expect the same from everybody. Materials, 3d, colour rendering, if it all possible. Im having a hard time looking at this project in audition to the many questions in june and have not been addressed. Mr. Fung . Mr. Winslow, theres no exposures variance, only a rearyard variance. Correct. I imagine the building complies or doesnt comply with composure and the addition doesnt trigger a need for an exposure variance. It doesnt. The building is on an existing substandard width rightofway. Which if it were new would trigger a need for an exposure exception. But considering that the existing its an existing addition. This doesnt trigger a need for a variance because its an addition to an existing addition. The architect for the permit holder has indicated a panellized siding. Does that conform to your requirement . please stand by . Commissioner richards . A good portion really had a compelling reason for me to say its extraordinary, project right where it is at was location of the open space. And then our consistency on other projects like the very next, which i do remember, i always have a hard time supporting and recommend we disapprove the project. Is that a motion . It is. Second. If there is nothing further commissioners, there is a motion to take dr, and disapprove the Building Permit application. [roll call] that motion passes unanimously 60. Okay. Do you want to take a little recess . We are going to take a ten minute recess, and then come back the commission does not tolerate any disruption, or outburst of any kind. Please silent your mobile device is paid when speaking before the commission, state your name for the record. Commissioners, we are now on your 3 00 p. M. Calendar for items 11, 12a, for case numbers 2015014028env, 2015014028dva, 2015014028cua for final Environmental Impact report. The adoption of findings and statements of overriding considerations. Planning code and zoning map amendments and conditional use authorizations for the property of 3333 california street. Would you kindly turn on sf gov. Tv. Good afternoon, commissioners, i am with the department staff. I have a couple of materials for you, updated draft, special use districts, sorry about all of the paper. Updated ordinances for the s. U. D. , a Planning Commission memo, as well as we have Public Comment letters and support and opposition for your benefit. Before i begin, have been asked to make notice to the public, a stenographer is present to create a transcript of todays proceedings. I would encourage all speakers to speak slowly, clearly in order to assist in this process. We would appreciate a members would state their name for the record. However, they are commissioners, before you is the certification of the final Environmental Impact report for the mixeduse project located at 3333 california street. I am joined by several colleagues of mine from the Planning Department, as well as the office of economic and Workforce Development. All of which are available to answer questions during the deliberation. Joining me specifically, is the Environmental Planning division. The project sponsor team. After providing a brief hesitation of the project including the required approval actions. I will hand the presentation over to k, regarding the certification of the sdi are. Lee will provide a discussion of the Development Agreement. The project sponsor team will divide a detailed overview of the project. Requesting the commission to certify that the cir. After that you will be asked to adopt sql findings including findings and adopting statements of overriding statements. Otherwise known. You will be asked to adopt the recommendation to the board of supervisors to approve an ordinance, primarily amend the planning code text to establish the 3333 california street special used district or s. U. D. , to amend the associated height maps, and specify Additional Development controls for the project site. Youll be asked to adopt a recommendation for the board of supervisors to approve a Development Agreement, and then you will be asked to reprove a request for conditional use authorization. This would allow structures to exceed 40 feet within the arm zoning districts, a child facility to be replaced at a different location on the project site, and a pud with modifications from the requirements of the planning code as described in greater detail. The project would redevelop the subject property with residential, retail, child development, parking space and open uses. [reading notes] the project within construct 1313 New Buildings ranging from four story duplex at townhomes, and Apartment Buildings as residential only or mixeduse buildings on the first and second floors with residential uses above the second floor. Overall, the project includes a total of approximately 1. 4 million square foot of new and rehabilitated floor area, then hundred 78,000 square feet of residential area. 35,000 square feet of retail floor area. 850 Parking Spaces, and 839 bicycle Parking Spaces. The project will provide 744 dwelling units, with 25 provided as onsite senior affordable units which is 185, one bedroom and studio units. It would include the following dwelling mix. [reading notes] with 44 of the dwelling units containing at least two bedrooms are larger, the project excee