It. And also, we did research about the impact of the Third Addition from the front street and the back street. From the front street, these red lines are the site that you can see. So according to this research, you can see only a bit of the building above, the corner of the building. So we dabble that you can see, you know, the third story from the front street. But we dont recognise it because of this setback. I did research about the visibility from the backyard, the alley. And according to my research, the elevation angle, the difference between the elevation angle between the second and third story is only 7degrees. So if we had a third story, our elevation angle differs, increase of only 7degrees. Its not like 35 or 45. So its not that much. So based on the research, i concluded that not much skyview is blocked by the audition of the third floor. Im the owner of this property and would like to thank you for your time today and would like to mention one thing that there are three story houses in the neighborhoods. On inverness alone, there are four between slote and eucalyptus and there are two on 26 avenue. The reason that theyre not noticeable is that its set up quite nicely and theyre not blocking the view. So we believe that adding a third story is not going to be a nuisance in the neighborhood. Thank you for your time. Are there any members of the public here in support of the project sponsor . Seeing none, you have a twominute rebutle, dr requesters. If the dr requesters, you would each get two minutes for a rebuttal. You dont have to use it project sponsor, you have a twominute rebuttal. Ok, seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioner moore . Ive been looking at the plans of this thirdfloor addition, and im trying to fine the real meaning of it, because the addition proposed for this building is described as a great room, which in terms of how we norm little describe the use of rooms does not quite its not clear what this room is being used for. So this third floor, its set back from the street, 20 plus feet consists of a great room, a stair coming up and a very small backroom, powder room. I do know see the necessity, unless someone can describe what its used for. Similarly, i dont know what this is. Staff have any idea what that usage is . I have some personal ideas watcofwhat a great room is. I will allow the opportunity to the project sponsor of what the use is. Thank you again. The reason we considered the audition of the third story is that right now my wife and i are getting older and i my wife is becoming to need assistance. And my daughter will be living with us. So in order for us to live comfortably, even though my daughter is a daughter, but we would like to keep the separate, private living space. And we considered adding or extending the existing first floor but that would ruin our background, which ibackyard, whs habit and she enjoys it very much and im sure our neighbor enjoys the backyard and the yard in the alley. So our only option is to add a smaller addition on the subfloor without causing any layers or additional shadowing on the neighborhood and thats why we deciddecided to go for this. Sir, im not clear, what usage is the great room. This would be the living space, living room for my daughter, yes. Its a living room, ok. K. Commissioner johnson. Commissioner fung . Another question for staff in terms of the residential design team, was there any discussion about setbacks of the rear of the addition . No, i dont believe there were. Again, primarily, when we were looking at thirdstory additions, we look at them we look at them from both the front and back and sides. This was keepe deemed to be an t not to the ones adjacent because of the ones between those properties, inclusive of the rear yards. Commissioner johnson. So i do think its really important to understand the use of this space and im glad we had a conversation with the project sponsor. Just in having reviewed this and having heard from staff one do think that this project is in keeping with what we normally see and so im in support of the project and move to approve not take dr and approve. Im second. Ill second. Seeing nothing further, theres a motion that has been soutbeenseconded. roll call . So moved, commissioners and that passes 50. Commissioners, this will place us on item 11 to 201810 good afternoon. David winslow, planning staff, architect, the item is a public initiated request for a review of public application 20180681022 for a horizonal rear addition and twostory vertical addition for a total of 3430 square feet to an existing twostory Single Family dwelling to add two new dwelling unis at units at33 capra. Theres light and shadow impacts, loss of privacy with the surrounding neighborhood character. Not the buildings Historic Resource status is a category c. The first dr requester, Joshua Callahan at 49 capra way is concerned with four main issues that the building is out of character and scale with the surrounding for the following reasons, that the rear massing is not combatable a compatible r and its incompatible with the block face and roof deck will create noise impact. The second dr requester of 222, that it ignores the historical relevance as a contributor to the residential Historic District and two, that the heightheheight and bulk is out l and the determination of rear yard averaging were done and lead to a larger building footfingerprint than would be allowed and fourth, the impacts to his property, as well as privacy and noise impacts from the roof deck. His alternatives include preserving the facade, setting back the third story an additional 12 feet, reducing Building Height to three stories and maintaining a shared light well between 33 and 39 capra. Today the department has received four letters in opposition and eight letters in support. Im sure more have arrived on your desk since the publishing of this packet. However, the residential Design Review found the property is a category a im sorry, i have to revise that. It was listed as an a due to its location within an identified sequa district. The eligible Marina Corporation residential historical district but determined not to be individually eligible Historic Resource but a contributor to the district. Although the alterations are major, it did not appear to have an impact on that district and the reservation was not recommended, nor required. Two, that the adjacent fourstory building and other threestory buildings enabled the massing this addition to meet the fourstory height of the transition down to the twostory building immediately to its west. The shape and proportion of the bay proportion represents a scale at the street. Third, the rear massing transitions from the building to the shallower shadow building to west from adjacent properties. The main rear wall of the building has been reduced by one foot, three inches to respond to the career measurement of rear yard averaging. The light well at 39 capra appears to have been filled in with a skylight. The department does not typically require a matching condition to such lightwells that have been altered. Five, did not see any extraordinary impacts with respect to light and air due to the passing of this building. The roof deck is served by one step warehouse. Therefore, staff recommends not talking dr and approving the project. This concludes my presentation and im here to answer questions. Thank you. Contrary to what you may here in a few minutes, im not antihousing or Family Housing. In fact, im in favour of these goals and support 33 capra way to be converted to a threestory building. The project will not have a Material Impact on me personally, but these averrings are irrelevant. Were here to decide if this is appropriate for the block and neighborhood or extraordinary for its context, setting a par example for any future development. As proposed, 33 capra is extraordinary, it pushes the massing to code extremes in every dimension. Theres a roof deck, almost no front setback on the fourth floor and minimum rear yard setback and each is this direct contrast to the precedent in the neighborhood on this block. As someone raising my family here, i believe those who have behaved ibehaved in the communin past, will forefit that and made more urgent by 39 capra to be redeveloped by whatever guidelines that. Fortunate, there are simple steps. They will bring this into an established design patterns, work with neighbors and allow it to move forward quickly. It will create a meaningful bridge by requiring eight feet here and there will be 1,000 square feet for a twobedroom family unit to go along with four unit for the lower floors and crucially, a fourth floor setback allows for additional outdoor space on the roofdeck. Third, we encourage planning staff to revisit, allowing 25 25 capra to allow for a setback. 33 is an existing outlier to the midspace. Finally, i believe process and conduct matters. It has been disheartening that the reasonable concerns with harassing phone calls and threats with re retribution. Rather than calling me personally, they attempted to turn this into a professional embarrassment by calling the ceo of my employer to suggest retribution including opposition to future work my employer may have the city suggesting an eye for an eye, regardless of a projects context. That conduct, like the design, is indeed extraordinary and should be modified before the Commission Moves password. Thank yoforward. Thank you for yd consideration. Next drp. Thank you for allowing me to be here today. This is what you can see here in the picture. Section 1b, project is out of scale in height, weight and bu bulk. This project will be precedent setting for the entire neighborhood. Section 1c, inaccurate rear yard averaging. Once this issue has been brought up to planning, it has been addressed and corrected. Section 2a, reduction of the blocked open space. This diagram of block 0463a depicts a block with an open space. The only exception is 2 25 25 c. This provides much needed light and vegetation and needs to be preserved for all of the surrounding residents. This is a rendering of the proposal next to the only outliar which is 25 capra. Section 25b, major light and air impact. The proposed project will block nine windows on the southwest side of 25 spaw 25 capra. Proposed project will block 100 of the light to the shared light well, turning their kitchen into a cave. Number three, proposed project will have further light and air impact on 10, 45, 49 and 51 caprap. Privacy from a ra roof deck and most are in threestory buildings. Fourstory decks are seldom seen, requiring an open staircase for access, further adding bulk in height. This is an element that in reality given the San Francisco weather will get very little use, but it will increase the price of the unit. This is a prime example of a massive allowed and built roof deck and its on a third story. Imagine if this was on a fourstory. This is across the block and section three, in or for the project to move forward, were asking the commissioner require the following. Number one, preserve the historic facade, restoring and enhancing th intrinsic featuresd incorporate three setbacks between 33 and 25 capra. Building not to exceed three story and number five, eliminate the fourth floor roof deck. Number six, preserve the shared light well between 33 and 39 capra and thank you for your consideration and uncouplin und. Any members of the public in support of the dr requesters . Come on up . Good afternoon commissionerrerings. We own the property at 45 capra way. We listened to the neighbors and proceeded in a way that respected all concerns. We set back our fourth floor by 15 feet to comply visually with the rest of the block. We could have added a roof deck, we refrained from doing so. We tried to protect the defining future of the block which is a midblock open space. Deny the plans for the roof deck to not set an unhealthy rest sent for the neighborhood and muminimize the impact. Have the rear setback guidelines that are consistent with the overwhelming majority of the units and protect the midblock open space and i would like to add that we have engaged the developer to having an inperson meeting but found him to be dismissive, arrogant and sanctimonious. Aheahe tried to bully his way io getting what he wants with no regard for the neighbors of the neighborhood. I hope you rule in a strong message discouraging that behaviour because there is no need for that. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you, next speaker, please. Gad afternoon, commissioners. Im with the San Francisco coalition. Were not objecting to the three units, were ok, bring on more density, but not ok to deface a contributor to the Marina CorporationHistoric District and a mass massive scale of ths project is problematic. You can build these three units without the historic correcter. The hre itself, it clearly states that this building maintains the integrity of design and its an authentic architecture and does have an authentic architecture. Again, this is the hra statement here and has been unaltered since its construction in 1926. With the sole exception of the sunroom added in 1933. Even the staff agrees with the hre in a sense that the subject property is a contributor to the Marina Corporation residential Historic District as mr. Winslow previously attested. So i suppose my question is, why is it that the project sponsor could not have added the vert cavertical addition by retaining the facade. We see this day and day out. Many, many projects that, you know, do vertical additions and maintain the facade or even if they do make vertical additions with a new structure and new facade, they have a front setback. So that is quite unusual for us to see that this beauty, this is a contributor to the Historic Resource and does have its twin next door being defaced and not existing with vertical conditions that start with the front setback. And also, as mr. Frankle pointed out, it is the prevailing pattern in the marina, where you would have taller buildings and corner streets and then shorter buildings in between. So this is going to set a domino effect. If this structure will go on at the same height as the corner building, obviously well have more and more of this as the time goes by. Lastly, i would like to speak a few words about the character of the project sponsor and the owners. The project sponsor all along maintains that the yard averaging that he was doing was correct. Even though he could not use the sunroom of the adjacent neighbor, because it wasnt half the width of the lot. Even the staff pointed this out to them, but they maintained that until mr. Frankle did the measurement and brought that up and thats when they backed off. Of course, you heard about how the owner was making intimidating remarks and calling the employer of one of the dr requesters. This is not acceptable. Please acts foplease ask for ref scale. Any more Public Comment for dr requesters . Good afternoon. My name is al brandy, a 44area resident in the marina, in close proximity to this project. As i sit here listening to these discretionary review requests, i see a common theme. The common theme seems to be Big Development versus the established nakeds. Neighborhoods. I think theres nothing wrong with development. I think we have to develop as a city. But when people propose the development as proposed in this case, that so radically changes the character of the neighborhood, i call upon you to do something about this and stop it. What i think we need is some kind of compromise. There must be development but there must be a respect for the neighborhood as it exists. In this project, where the proposal is for maximum coverage, maximum extension, maximum density, the addition of 3400 square feet is no minor request. It is massive development. There could be a cro com row co, allow the development and keeping the neighbor for as it is. There was a slogan some years ago that said small is beautif beautiful. Small and mo moderate can be beautiful and i speak in support for thistie this discretionary. Any more Public Comment in support . Seeing none, project sponsor . A large Single Family house or two large duplexes would have idead a better return. Its between a fourstory 17unit building to the east and twostory Single Family house to west. Im sorry, were we given twice as much time because theres two drs . In this case, no. Ill truncate this. Both of the immediate neighbors are supportive of the project and along with the western neighbors letter of support, we have 29 off additional letters of support for the project. Of the eight properties along the block face, five are four stories tall, one is three stories and with our project side in the western neighbor in support being two story, the proposed project will create three units, two smaller on the new third and fourth floors at 1500 square feet and 1300 fear quot1300 squarefeet respectivel. The project includes an horizonal expansion to the roar. Rear. Changes have been substantial and this is due to the request which changes the project over five times. Weve also removed 570 square feet of the hubble space. We did meet with dr requesters on may 3 and met with David Winslow and josh callahan. We had a very good conversation with them. But at that meeting with David Winslow, we spoke about what his concerns were and one was actually that he was asking for a setback at the front of eight feet and described to hu him tht and that would remove one of the bedrooms from the unit. We felt this requested served no purpose, especially since he lives three properties down. Secondly, there has been concerns over his request about the roof deck, of removal or actually we then talked to hum about, is there a way to alter or address the issues about the roof deck . He did say he would be willing to consider removing the dr if we made the deck exclusively to the top unit and if we set it back from the back three feet. Mind you its eight feet on one side, five feet from the other and close to, i believe, 35 feet from the front line and we described the reason which is basically because the unit is so small and three stories up from the backyard, we would like to make this of unit viable for a young family. The cu