Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    November 25, 2013 2:00am-2:31am PST

2:00 am
this is one of the things for the city to see that the general population is aging. there's different parts of the discussion that includes with specific reference to seniors for income and the design component for all components so on but it's the board issue of the city impartial and practical speaking about protection in place. we hopefully, will >> the clerk will read the journal from the previous day add this as we move forward i want the department as well as the supervisors office to spend more time on discussing exactly why 3 or 6 years vs. a rage for
2:01 am
3 to 5 for certain conditions because if i hear the gentleman kreshlg who are indeed hands on practitioners i have to believe that the time is to short that i i want to open the discussion about aging in place as a way to look at affordability and preferences for that. >> commissioner wu. >> so following up on the earlier information on the packet. i think it's important and i assume ultimate rent board will give the tenant who have been ellis effected all the information about the housing that's one hundred percent affordable like bridging and
2:02 am
housing and go to every single person. i think that's the kind of housing that's going to serve the ellis active people because their income is lower. i want to make a motion as recommend by commissioner wu for this legislation >> second and i want a clarification of the 3 year review if that's y what you're saying. yeah. i would have preferred the short period of time but it's been four or five years it's be it's been taken care of. 3 makes sense to me.
2:03 am
i'm supportive only of the ellis act situations. owner occupied move in that's an entirely different situations because he's using his own property for his own situation so i think that the ellis is a different situation because they're getting out of the rental market and they're using it for other perspires that effect other people. i'll support this reluctantly on the issue of 3 or 6 years >> commissioners there's a motion and second on the floor excuse me. to adapt a recommendation for approval to include a 3 year review by board of supervisors. >> commissioner moore.
2:04 am
commissioner wu. and president fong. so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero >> commission is going to take. >> during those preiss and when sprg speaking before the proceedings if you care too do staurd. item feigning has already continued for item 16 at 238 eureka street. >> dr. requester. you have before a erect district street project that's proposed
2:05 am
for constructed for a vertical condition to address addition the vertical addition would add two feet additional feet to the height of the building and the rear edition would be multiple steroid and add about this or that .5 poet to the building overall depth and it will include revolver decks it be to be a single-family residence. the dr requesters for the architecture context to the neighborhood and it would impact their foundation the water system. the petition is signed by 21
2:06 am
neighbors who live within a 2 hundred block of eureka street and are opted because of the building scale. 7 neighbors within this same a block have sent letters in support. and the parties involved have been 20 to communities boards but have not been able to get resolve. there's are nearly 12 ideal structures and the department finds the buildings comparable with the neighborhood and it will be minimally visual prosecute the street. furthermore, the rear edition reporters the scale it sets down
2:07 am
to the grade level as it sets into the lot. the edition incorporates side setbacks and prevents sunlight to the prop. the department does not recommend that project >> dr requester. >> can we put things here. >> yep if i put it down there it will come on. >> but you guys the planning commission has already passed it so does it matter. >> no sir, this is in order to
2:08 am
take discretionary review. >> islam is phillip i've acknowledged or live on eureka for 24 years. our home was built on eureka street in the heart of the castro. there are real aesthetic home. those are the yellow are the people opposed i don't know how to do that this year people opposed to want expansion. we did to the collect names on people outside of our block. there are ago people that on eureka street that are against it. worn-out opted to expansion that's not intruthful and keeping with the style including
2:09 am
proposition. we find the deliberate blatantly and staircase with obstructed views into our bedrooms unobstructed into our - into our bedrooms not only intruthful before you corporate i didn't as well. he has a balcony and a deck that has visual into our bedrooms for the local citywide and this mansion calls into question the
2:10 am
awe authenticity to our street. this is a picture of the back of our homes. his home would extend out 20 feet beyond that it would be like the yellow area the first two homes the actinic is unkupd occupied but the cut out of this house is acquit intrusive. the mullins they expanded the same square footage and did so without being intrusive and made the characteristic of the original homes okay. that's this house ass has capacity 20 - one thousand
2:11 am
square feet and this is expanded one thousand feet but without being intrusive. another home is expanding 11 hundred square feet and didn't change the character of our homes. it will open the demeanors to make the expansion totally out of step. it's out off our well propositions homes. the victorian light mansion didn't fit. those are preearthquake victorians. when it's done will it have the same feel as this. san francisco is universal known as it's victorians. will this a be a - will the famous view be replaced with a
2:12 am
bastard listed mansion. this is a row of still intact victorians. it offers a connection to nature and afford 24 additional square feet of plants and son. this doesn't meet the change and mr. brown can expand his square footage the same as other mansions. it was done as san francisco legal specks but a one-size-fits-all lou law is not a fit. when you look at the proportionality it's massive. this is even convertible this is 25 feet i don't know why those are equal i measured them this morning >> we've done everything we
2:13 am
could. >> thank you sir, your time is up. >> thank you. >> i want to call names of speakers in supportive of the dr. >> (calling names). >> if your name has been called feel free to approach the podium. >> i'm tamara i'm phil's one of but my speaking for tor i didn't downstairs who lives at the 254 eureka street. this statement is to request the planning department not to allow the expansion as currently proposed but to require the owner richard brown to consultant with his neighbors
2:14 am
with a plan that has the approval of the immediate neighbors. indian it the planning department as required the owner of 238 eureka to mitigate the extension to the front of the house. peroxide the attic extension is only visual from the street thus keeping the integrity of the vieshlt. but my understanding which the drawings has significant impacts of the rear building to the neighborhood. it's extended to 10 feet of stairs and the second floor is 24 feet and its third floor again extends further. it reduces the neighborhoods light and impacts on the overall
2:15 am
integrity of the back home where it intrudes into a park like spates and boo would reduce the significant quality of life. the plan looks at this and i strongly ask you to look at this at the rear. i have concerns about the parking on the street extending it to approximately 4 thousand 82 square feet approximately two times about equivalent increase the numbers of cars. while the city limits the number of permits 2 per how old is doesn't limit the amount of cars. this is again, this is torrey
2:16 am
spanking my neighbor i bought any home in 2006 and didn't change the footprint and i didn't extend it because of the makes sense requests. i do recognize that any neighborhood changes over time but i hope the city mgdz the changes to make sure the changes are characteristic of the neighborhood >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is james frost i will u i live on eureka street i 3ru6r7d there in 1984 i raised two son and the oldest teaches and this you young one is a partner with me in a smoking gun
2:17 am
in san francisco. i'm very invested in this city. and i'm acquit concerned with the direction our cities going with the housing stock for for a fact for folks like my son. i've worked here since 1975 and witnessed many changes over the years. i'm not opposed to change. many of my neighborhood including myself have modified our homes. i built a one story edition and didn't build a second because of my neighbors. i'm opposed to the proposed project as it now stand for two reasons. first and foremost i believe this project will change 238 from a house that blends with the prominent size of the rest
2:18 am
of the homes on our block and it few people will be able to live in. and the multiple decks that will rise above the yards. i hope this panel will consider more than justice this how this building will look like from the street. we must consider this what this will do to affordable housing stoke in this neighborhood and i and how it will impact the quality of life. i believe their talking about 5 bedrooms and 5 bathrooms i'm not sure why this is. it puts housing stock. my kids have been searching for a place to live they fortunately have found places but this is
2:19 am
making a footprint it's only the super rich are going to be able to afford >> president fong and commissioners i'm bob, i live on eureka. i want to add my voice to object to the scale and a inappropriationness of the scale. the 5 bedrooms and 5 bathrooms and an elevator is not in scale with our neighborhood. it's not in character with san francisco. this amaze to a tear down. the facade is being saudi but i this this mcmansion i think it's called moreover the whole
2:20 am
neighborhood is going to have to suffer from one of our neighbors. i ask the commission not to inflict this on our neighborhood. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> president fong and members of the board. i'm michael and my partner and i own 246 erect the property directly to the south of the subject property. with that yep. right over here this back mudroom this back shed is glass fitting that's the way we bought it for the last 38 years and it formed our kitchen it's basically where we eat and live etc. it's open this would be mr.
2:21 am
britain's house all of this would be put in darkness because of the new yiths that will cut off our light and privacy and again, we feel the bulk of it is inappropriate. the rear of our highway getting the glass all of this will be intrusive on us. we're now above him because of the way the hill is he'll be above us. one of the things he'll be above us in our upstairs bathroom we have a window that is light and sky etc., this year this will be closed in a well. so we'll not have access to the
2:22 am
outside. again, we brought this up to brown mr. brown he responded with frosted glass but only the changes he wants. >> hello, i'm a resident on eureka street been there for 40 years. we've been there long-term. it's a wonderful block and about how far architecture in our view this project is out of scale with the existing neighborhood. we've been able to accommodate two children by adding a room down and it's been adequate.
2:23 am
this neighborhood we've all worked together and tried to honor each other's view vuks projects have been sensitive to the nodes even if neighborhoods. we feel this is out of scale with our neighborhood. if this is approved then the next house to sell will be wanting to be remodeled and soon we've lost the character of our neighborhood. thank you very much. >> are there any additional speakers in support of the dr. okay. seeing none. project sponsor, please. >> good afternoon president fong and honorable commissioners.
2:24 am
i'm the owner on eureka and proposing the project also my project architect is here if you have questions. i've covered some points i could use the old as well. project goals the reason i'm doing this expansion have numerous. address need for familiar editions and work requirements. there are two of us living in the home and i use one for office and equipment etc. address family and friends for disabled access. my parents are elderly with a likely possibility they'll be
2:25 am
moving in with me. i have a friends in wheelchairs and my friend is in one. i can't host family events holidays because people can't get into my home. address for more than amenities one goal is to restore the facade it's currently stucco. naturally i adhere to the planning code and contagious advantage for other opportunities during this process. so project development. the project was developed over several months working with my architecture firm and also the planning department.
2:26 am
so there right quite a bit of feedback that we received from the planning department that was morpd into this project. so you know there's been things about out of control development but because we're adhering to the guidelines i don't think that's the case. we have certain restrictions. the up slope prevents development 2349s garbage space. the basement space that was a method to expand the house that was done it's not possible the planning department said we can't build a house out to the sidewalk. so we can't go that route. preservation of cabled rooflines to required to increase the set
2:27 am
back and the rear set back so those designed were all incorporated. those several pictures of the front facade. i wanted to include one more. this is the further up the block and further down the block than the ones in our packet. so this the the additional fade what it's going to look like. in that more narrow angle it's on the near side of the street as well as the far side. 311 notification process during that notification process only 3 households contacted the project architect or myself. and we had met with those folks
2:28 am
and tried to work out you know where we could make changes. skipping adopt to the third point. wool do the second. we have full approval from the residential guidelines from the residential design team review and also the planning department. we've included an increase set back on the north side of the edition due to the staircase busing because the staircase goes down it decreases the sunlight. the project was reviewed by the eureka valley neighborhood association both jack heating and judith. during the process indication
2:29 am
>> sir, your time is up. >> calling now speakers that are in support of the project sponsor (calling names). >> good day commissioners i'm betty brown and this is my husband and we're rick browns parents i've had both composed replaced and my husband is 87 on medication and has had a stroke. rick is helping to pay our financial bills and for the last several years has spent a lot of
2:30 am
his vacation time helping us with duties. we find we depend upon on him moore. we're fortunately, we live individually and rick is including space for plans to make it easier for us to get around. that removes so much worries about our uncertain future. having an elevator will help because our son in law is in a chore. thank you for listening and your consideration >> spe