Pressman ship. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. My name is andy levine. I am an architect, i live in the 400 block of 29th street, three doors down from the property. My family has lived there for 22 years now, and we have been very excited that theres to be a project to take away this abandoned building that is more than 20 years that has been empty. We saw the drawings for the project, for the first time last wednesday. It was not mailed out, as part of the 311 process because of the conditional use area i left a message for mr. Townes, he did not call me back. We left an email, week later he replied to the email. It turns out they were the wrong drawings area their outdated drawings area he sent us updated drawings, they are very close. So, for the last week it has been a hectic time to try to elicit a response from the neighbors to talk about what we thought the project was good or bad. In the process, i did send to the commission the petition that we have been talking to neighbors. Im just going to put it in here. That is page three, we will start with page one, which i did send to you guys. There is 11 signatures on that from neighbors, on the street. Up until today, i guess i can put this in, the 36 people have talked to me about their interest and their priorities. Yesterday the site action was not included in the drawings area yet it is something i always include with my site permit and conditional use application. This shows the 6foot high person across the street, the 1. To mitigate the fact that there is a fourth story, plus a fifth story deck. This is a drawing that shows all of the red areas are areas that they are proposing to build that do not match the light wells. I always match the light wells are the Planning Department requires that our addition matches the light wells. This is on the second and third floor thank you mr. Levine. Your time is up. Any other Public Comment on this item . Okay. Public comment is now closed. Commissioner moore. May i ask the architect finish his presentation. I would like to have technical input on this particular project please come and finish her presentation. Can you please my cover so we can hear you . That would be great. We have talked about the light wells and how they are not mimicking it, and they are not as wide, and as deep, and they are an extra story high. The black is a drawing that was part of the permit by mr. Weiss. The red is information that i have added on the roof deck is not shown in the section. It is higher than 40 feet by 3foot 6 inches. The other thing that concerns me is that they have two duplex units with four bedrooms and 3. 5 baths at an elevator connecting them. The living floor level is 14foot high ceilings raise. Which is as high as that molding here in the space area if they were, instead, to remove the top floor and dig down to feet and have a garden apartment in the backyard, they can still build as much Square Footage as they wanted. The roof deck is hardly ever going to be used. We get nice sun in the afternoon. The other thing is, this is the existing street view, the White Building to the left is the subject property. It was declassified as a Historic Building by the environmental evaluation review. This is a 1939 picture that does show it right there going back view, the property is not a onestory, and it is shorter than all of the other buildings on the block. This is to scale. I took his drawings and superimposed them. The fourth floor, which i showed in the site section, is visible from across the street. He mentioned in his proposal, from the down low, you do not see as much. That is true. There is a Tall Building and that is the way the slope works. From across the street, and up the hill you see it a lot. It is a fourstory, plus a fifth story. The other thing that we have concerns about his the facade rendering, and the materials. I personally believe there is too many materials area you have stone tile at the bottom mr. Weiss has said he is into use high quality materials, and mr. Mcgraw is a quality builder. I dont think the design is quality. It is a collage of elements that are not working together. There is a syntax and a context on the block. It does not have to be victorian. It can be modern, but there is such a thing as good modern. What we are concerned about, and i think what really has inflamed us is across the street, there is a victorian behind the stucco. Which, in 2013, they replaced with Assembly Building here. The building to the right, which was a victorian, two years ago was replaced by this boxy, out of scale with windows building. There is a collection of materials on there. There is stucco. It is a random collage that does not work together. Its complicated to more than one material. I would prefer one material. Either shingles, wood, taco, stone, but not three materials, with concrete at the bottom. I think that is my case. Thank you. Commissioner moore, did you want to want to say this is important, because the drawings themselves leave a number of things and said in the package that we received. There is no material description. There is no 3d, and particularly the misrepresentation that the sloping site with a 14. 6 ceiling height, makes you wonder if the front room really works. For all intents and purposes to really modify the impacts of this aggressive massing. I believe society is suitable for a twostory building. The building that existed is 750 square feet. With a total of 6,004 to 55 feet for two units sounds to the collective and too much out of context. I think the neighbors have made a convincing argument, and i would agree with what many people think. The architect chose this particular building it is desperate, is one way of saying it, out of context. It makes me feel uncomfortable about understanding context. I think the window size, and a number of materials, and how they put the collage together it is something at this moment, i cannot support. I would encourage two units, but they have to be more moderate size. They have to be fitting context. They have to be fitting adjacent buildings on the light wells. And they have to obey two situations, giving out the stepping of the site allows for significant Square Footage. However, a roof deck is not part of this as far as i can tell. I think the building has to go back to redesign, come back and respond better to what all neighbors said he had said thank you. Commissioner hillis. I agree with neighbors who have said that, given the size, this could be five units or more. We cant do that, this is an rh2. This could be an argument that this should not be rh2. It shares many of the characteristics of no e valley, and clearly it wasnt rh2. There are apartments on this block that exceed two units. I agree with the architect who commented at the end that there could be some design modifications to this, it is large and it has too much going on on the front of it. Also weve got the opportunity to put three units in this building, that of two units with the legislation that has been passed to the ground floor behind the garage to be a units, and then the third and fourth floor could be a unit, too. We have varying degrees of size. A thousand squarefoot garden apartment, 1300 squarefoot flat classic flat, and then a larger, 2200 square feet to floor, fourbedroom unit. We could get three units in a spot that used to be one unit. That is what i would like to see. I think i could support some reduction of the fourth floor. I think taking off the fourth floor, calling it a day, is not going to get anybody anywhere. There is a large building on the side of this with a huge blank wall that i think you can take advantage of, and the architect does go beyond that. That would be my direction. Doing some design modifications to make this facade similar. Bake at three units in this building. It is a large living room, den, kitchen area. You could still have a fourbedroom unit on the top. Thank you. Commissioner richard. I scratch my head and kind of , section 317 establishes all of these criteria, it might come down to where the project promote designed to enhance neighborhood character. Whether the project promotes construction of a welldesigned house. I dont think it really passes that one. [inaudible] i agree with commissioner hillis, i think adding three units in there, slightly smaller size would make them more affordable. On the design guidelines, or the residential design guidelines, policy [reading notes] i dont think this really fit. I really think it should go back , and be re looked at. I think Esther Levine comment s comments, i receive them well. You can make the building seems smaller by making the cubic space more efficient. I dont feel like i have enough to approve it today. I moved to continue and have the project come back. Commissioner fung. I can handle the three stories. I am not sure i would be with the fourth floor, in this case. Contextually both this block, and portions of the two adjacent blocks are all two and threestory buildings. There are some things that i think have been missed stated, in terms of criticisms of the plan, because the residential control, does not require the match exact the, the dimensions both on the horizontal and the debt which is what is shown by the last speaker sketches. I usually dont want to be asked at excel buildings, otherwise we would be here all night. I avoid that discussion. Thank you. I will say that i support the motion to continue this, i also want to see three units here. I think if we are going to vastly increase what is there right now, i want to see more density and more affordability. To me this crop project reads as a specular tory project. You are trying to i think some of that was supported by the Public Comment that we heard. Because once a part the project. I am not ready to approve it right now. I do want to see the facade read more in context with the neighborhood, and to support our general plan goals of, you know, greater affordability and also to produce more housing. I am agnostic, on the fourth floor actually, i think if we get a project that is welldesigned, and support what this commission has barely stated about having rater density, and something that is more respectful, i could support a fourth floor. I would like to see what comes back. I would hope when you do come back, he would bring material board, so we can actually approve and see what the condition of the material that you give us, so we know exactly what we are getting from the facade. Two month . What they would that be . November 7. If we are asked for specific information on submittals that are to be included, the window cross so we know what kind of windows we are getting, more typical with the submittal guidelines that we are seeing posted on the planning website. This package falls short relative to the completeness of the package. Commissioner richards. A 3d drawing showing the context from different angles, please. Seeing nothing where the commissioners. A motion that has been seconded to continue this matter to november 7, with direction from commission on that motion. [roll call] that motion passes unanimously 60. That will place us on the item 14 a and b. For item numbers 2018002602cua and 14. You will consider the conditional use authorization while the administrator any member of the public here for item 15, at 49 how can, or 16081610 vallejo street, those matters have already been considered. Good evening commissioners youd item before you is a conditional use authorization request im sorry, hold on. Excuse me, folks in the gallery. We have an item before the commission right now. If you need to speak, you need to leave the room. A conditional use authorization for 411,821st street, legalize demolition and authorize reconstruction of the dwelling unit with a new basement level i vertical addition totaling approximately 3900 square feet. In addition, the project request variances from the zoning in is rated to construct with the setback and rear yard. The property is located in the open market for hood on the north side of 21st street. [reading notes] the existing building encroaching to the front setback and rear yard of the legal noncompliant structure. As a result, the demolition [reading notes] this concludes my presentation. Thank you. We will now hear from the project sponsor. Hi. I apologize, i am very nervous, i am the homeowner. My name is jenna, and ive never spoken to a commission before. Please bear with me. Thank you in advance for your patience. This is my familys home, that is why am seeking. I am here today with my husband, george. We have lived in noe valley for five years we had we are novice homeowners. We know very little about the planning or permitting process. We trusted the contractor and our architect to manage our renovation as we have demanding fulltime job. When we bought our home in 2017, we have a 2yearold and she is an absolute handful in the best possible way. Georges mom is retiring, planning to move in with us. We had to postpone her move as we do not have ways to accommodate her. Theyve been up for the past two weeks, and our daughter is the first grandchild on both sides, they would all move in with us if they could. We are here because our simple home upgraded has become challenging in every way, in terms of money, time, stress, it has been a tremendous heartache, and we are though sincerely apologetic that we are here. It was never our intention to be in this position. Our initial plan was to update our house, which was in very poor condition. The first to keep costs reasonable in terms of materials and timing as we are paying for two mortgages, and second to have the least impact on the neighbors. This is a key deciding factor for us in purchasing a home. We wanted to undertake a renovation that would preserve the homes footprint to maintain it as it existed and beautify the neighborhood by obtaining a home that was in dire need. Once we began renovation, the conduct for our home was built in the early 1900s. It is. [reading notes] the contractor approached us, with extensive change orders to address the conditions. We had no idea that these change orders would have additional permitting. If we have known that, we would have already moved in. The contractor undertook additional demolition which we felt was he was wrong to do this. [reading notes] [reading notes] we were surprised and embarrassed when the case was open on our home and we stopped work immediately. From our first meeting with lan and we been open and transparent and express consistent remorse. We wish we had never heard the phrase as new homeowners with no knowledge of the complicated regulations we regret we missed an opportunity to save time and money. [reading notes] we are eager to remedy our mistake. During this process, we met numerous times and responded to all emails probably, fully in in good faith. We are surprised, disappointed and hurt by the inaccurate and misleading narratives that are in fact minimally impacted. We have been nothing but open and responding to accommodate all valid concerns get we continue to undergo the appropriate costly, lengthy, permit process preferred to be presented any other way is inaccurate and hurtful. Months ago, these neighbors wished for a reduction in the rear depth of our home. With advice from planning, we agreed to as we want to maintain amicable relationships with the people we are going to be living next to a more portly we want to become compliant. This resulted in a reduction of 12 feet, in the rear depth of our home requiring redesign that has cost us more time and money. This is a significant benefit for these neighbors as they are gaining 12 feet of light, air. [inaudible] [reading notes] the architect will cover the details would we want to rest our concern about the changes they are requesting to cost money, and he lay and create a less Family Friendly home for us delay and create a less family from the home for us to get. This item is open for Public Comment. I have a few public speaker cards. Mr. David ross, cynthia schroeder, and mr. Curtis larson. If you could please come up. Someone. Good afternoon. My name is carlos. I live at 4124 21st street, i own and live in the house by 25 years, and im directly impacted by 411,821st street. Before i began, i would like to talk about a letter of support 411,821st street i do e this letter has come from, and i did not write it, sign it or send it. I do not support the proposed land you hearing. I am here to for myself. I have difficulty hearing sometime. Thank you for understanding my situation. I am concerned about colder temperatures, inside my house, as a Senior Citizen living in a fixed income. I cannot afford to and more money on, electricity. I would ask you to help keep as much light coming into my house. [inaudible] before there was more distance between my house and 4118. I had been able to walk into this space. My bathroom is much darker with a wall that has already been built. When the top floor started, it will be even darker. I am also concerned about the new house is so close, that i already have damage in my bathroom. The new owner stopped the water from coming into it. I would ask you, that you do not allow the new house to be built in closer to my house to provide me with enough air, light, and protection from future water damage. I am concerned about my privacy. The rear of the proposed house, both large windows on the third floor and secondfloor deck extension will look out and down into my rear windows. This causes me to lose most of my privacy. I would ask you to consider making the new house be no deeper than my house and i can obtain as much privacy as possible. For over 30 years [inaudible] the shadow cast by the new taller, and deeper house, especially in the winter, will cause shadows to my prized plants and be bad for them. I would ask you to consider reducing the height and depth of the new house, to help maintain my privacy and keep my rear yard. Thank you for hearing my concerns. Next speaker, please. I have updated letters reflecting carlos emails that he sent to planning. Hello commissioners, i am here as one of a group of neighbors concerned about the project at 4118 21st street. My families home is at diamond street where we have lived since 1997, north of the property, adjacent to it and downhill from it. Our kitchen dining area, and main bedroom face it. Because of the way owners handled the permitting process, neighbors did not have any opportunity to weigh in with concerns until march of this year. After demolition and construction had already taken place, and the project had been halted because of a violation. I would like to share some of the concerns that we have now regarding building privacy, and light. First, the new home is deeper, higher, at approximately 2. 5 times larger. It size sets a precedent for the neighborhood. Its height and depth to make it out of context with other homes on the block. According to the Planning Department repo