-- being distributed to you now from the coalition. each of these letters is the same. it is about neighbors. it is about height limits, folks, residential design -- height limits, bulk, residential design of lines. i am a neighbor for more than 51 years.

i urge a tight discretionary review of the project. >> i am amanda lee and i represent the property across the street from the project. i feel like this is too much. it casts a shower over the -- a shadow over the alley. there is no sunlight if that happens. i feel like it just causes dangers and stuff. i feel like there would not be an authority.

thank you. >> hello. i am jeremy. i am partial property owner of the building between lombard, 441443. although i do not oppose the entire project, i oppose a fourth floor that maximizes the wicked and the length of the lot. -- width and the length of the lot. it would make it completely dart and make the area -- dark

and make the area harder to rent out. >> rose marie. >> good evening, vice president and commissioners. my name is milligan. for 50 years i lived on the the street. i currently occupy an office at union and columbus. discretionary view process is long and difficult road. there are reasons, exceptional and extraordinary to unjustified this process application. this is a reiteration that i tried to simplify.

the exceptional because that is situated between two alley streets 17.5 inches wide. there are only three force-story buildings on each experian -- four-story buildings on edith. extraordinary. because of the history of development of telegraph hill by our regional planners. narrow avenues that would only support small business. extraordinary because there is no purpose or need to sell the entire lot with a building that is the maximum height allowed. the planning department now except the 40-foot height. the same developer was told they

could not do this in the floor plan. there are over 200 local residents. 120 of them on this block alone. they are united in their plea to have the fourth story removed. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is ed. i live right across the alley or street. right across from 13 edith street. webster's defines an alley as a narrow passageway between the buildings or streets. there is accessed through the single thoroughfare.

the fairly consistent architectural details result in a relationship with guidelines written by our city planning department. there is one critical factor to that height that is particularly important in maintaining its character. it is extremely important to achieve the desired result that we get witt four-story buildings along a 50-foot white st while we allow the same 40-foot structure all along a 20.5 white st. the slight downhill grade towards the end of the street reduces the apparent height dimension of the houses. of all of the 16 houses fronting

edith, only one single family home in two apartment buildings exceed the height. these buildings have been designed to max out the site that would replace the 30-foot wide home and the adjacent garden with a maximum 40-foot wide, 40-foot high structure that eliminates the open space and butts up against the buildings. this will block the neighbor's view of the sky. >> rose. >> good evening. my name is rosemary weiner and i live across from 30 edith alley.

by n. meyer the feel of a small- town community. buildings are mostly at the victorian period they are so charming. it may are even in books of san francisco. the annual block party was legendary. the proposed heights are taller than most other buildings. they are mostly two and three- story house says. the neighbors will be forced to look into the many new windows and an experience that will project into rooms and yards.

an oversized apartment building will completely destroy the ambiance. this is a precious part of san francisco. >> hiroshi. >> i am david. thank you for hearing us this evening. i am sticking up on behalf of my father in law that is behind this project. they currently casts shadows. the shadows study shows that it does not cause any changes in shadows other than one season

out of the year. that one season is the winter season when we need the sun for warmth. the study shows that at 3:00, the existing shadows being proposed. here is the shadow at noon. currently, if you look at this picture, this picture was taken at 3:00 on an october afternoon. this is the building next door, 40 edith, which has a 25-foot setback. this is the shadow here.

this has 0 setback. it goes up to the edge of the property line. if you allow the building here, it will cast a shadow and you will have no light in the alley at all. if you allow a building that size, it will be a black hole. i urge you not to build a four- story. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is hiroshi. i do not live in the area. i am concerned about the process. earlier this year and late last year, the planning department

had many meetings concerning d.e.r.'s. the public expressed that there was distressed in the department. they did not -- this trust -- distrust in the department. they did not trust the department. trust has to be earned over time. we wondered what happened over a period of two winnie's. -- two years. somehow, this has reversed itself. to going forward, one of the reasons i am here is that we do not want this to occur again to this project or in the future.

the planning commission now has an opportunity to correct what is not understandable to the public. perhaps it would be good for the commission to have the department explain why there was a reversal in such a short period of time. i do not recall any change in policy that would allow this to occur on such a small, narrow street. we were told that the street was so wide that that you could build high-rises. in this case, it is 12 feet. >> thank you. are there any additional speakers in support of the request your -- requestor?

>> i live right across from the project. residents of this alley have signed this depicted in orange. 3 are owned by the project's sponsors and exist between the two alleys. there are some absentee landlords. 17 of the 22 lots are owned by property owners in opposition to this project. 100% of all of the buildings and signed by owners and tenants oppose this project. in san francisco, it is very rare that landlords and tenants see eye to eye.

in this case, they do. not so much relatives, friends, or passersby, but the actual occupants in the alley. there are 80 additional signatures from surrounding streets. there are other people that care about their neighborhood. it is obvious that the planning department disapproval from the director, zoning administrator, and previous planner was clear. the opposition showed by this chart is clear. these people cannot be wrong. i hundley thank you for your time and attention. -- humbly thank you for your time and attention.

>> next speaker. >> by our arrived in 1964 from switzerland as an immigrant. it was an immigrant visa to worked for two years. 40 years ago, i move to edith street. this is my home. i even had a good landlord. over the years, there have been many changes on the street. property owners should have the right to improve their property, but not at the expense of everyone else who lives there. the charming atmosphere of edith street gives me the feeling that this is my home. most people who live in edith

street stay there. the project is too high to blend in with the other buildings. edith street is a special place. if we sit back and do not do anything with this special neighborhood, then it is gone for all that follow. thank you. >> thank you. >> my name is phillip williams. i am the owner of 19 edith street. my home as 26 feet away from the development. i support my neighbors about the height and the bulk of this

building degrading the beauty and character of the alley i l ive on. this new development claims to be an alteration of an existing 70-year-old building. making this claim, the project is able -- attempting to evade and force out planning requirements that would be a in a fact intended to limit the light and space. if this were recognized for what it truly is, which is a demolition of an existing building -- all that i am asking you to do is to take a good look

at the facade of the existing building and what is proposed and take a close look at the f loor plan of the existing building and what is proposed. apply the common sense that this is not an alteration. this is a demolition of a new building. as such, this is valid enough reason for considering a design review. >> thank you. >> i live directly across from the sponsor project. i grew up there. i got married and moved away. i still come back. we are not against that

building. we are against that four -- that fourth floor. we tried to work with them to come to a compromise. we have those projects. they were unwilling to do any of that with us without a way to meet them half way on certain things. that is why i feel that it \ the fourth floor should not be built. because of the shadows and the other pieces that would not be in keeping with the neighborhood. >> my name is franklin. i own and live at a single- family home which is just to the east of the property. there are a couple of hundred

people that are affected by this building. i would argue that i am perhaps the most affected. i came to san francisco in december, 1969. i lived most of that time on telegraph hill. five years ago i screwed up my courage and mortgage my soul to purchase my home. i regard these alleys as perhaps the most lovely and charming parts of this glorious city. i aspired to connect better to my community. i long to live among the stew of italian and chinese, young and old, and gentrified and working class. they have the right to renovate and rebuild their homes. we have worked hard through this

long and arduous process to work with a possible compromise. i thought early on that that could be effective. this massive building project, it could profoundly reform this. i urge you to reduce the size of this project. >> good evening, commissioners. i am stephen lee. i have lived in this area of for 40 years since 1970.

i am really against this building. it will be blocking all of the sunlight. i enjoy some light every day. thank you. >> thank you. are there any additional speakers in favor of the request third? seeing none, project sponsor. there is one mort? -- more? >> if i hear that ominous bell once more, i will be encouraged to install it in our church. we have some long winded

preachers. it is a little bit frightening. you have heard the pleas of all of these people. what else can we say? you have heard it so many times. we have understood it. we are with you. we think your going to be wonderfully lenient and courageous. these are my people. not only the ones that come to the catholic church, but everyone. we do not distinguish. they come and we welcome them even more than the people we see every day. we love them all. i know you people know how much they care. this is a lovely place.

let your conscience be your guide. >> we did not get your name, father. >> i thought my name was publicized already. >> my name is jack. i have been there for 18 years. i have been there since the 1970's. i had been there before. i have worked with the youth all of my life. i know when people hurt. god love you. >> are there any additional speakers in support of the requestor? seeing none, project sponsor.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. the proposed addition has undergone a lengthy planning process since 2004. it has been through a critical review and scrutiny by planning staff including eight in design reviews. the process has culminated in a project that adds two residential units to the existing structure. it will be three stories over eight garage, which is typical of the area. the additional floors are to be set back over the additional structured to limit its impact and be respectful of the community and neighborhood. let me address the three primary concerns of the applicants. appropriates setbacks, the shadows, and the height.

more specifically, the elimination of the top unit. in regards to setbacks, we have undergone many revisions. in keeping with the guidelines, both the front and back lots are set back from the existing structure at the third and fourth floor levels, creating an appearance on both sides north and south. this color diagram, if we can have it on the overhead shows how we could have the different colors represent different levels. the top level is set back. it actually aligns with 40, which is set back also. at the top unit has been set back the most. it is 800 square feet.

that has always been our goal to create a code-complying condition. this is one of the few backyards in the area and contributes to an open feeling. in regards to shadows, peace -- in this proposed site is between two structures of similar height that already cast shadows. it is unique in the north-south direction. the rear facade faces north. the additional floors are a setback in a way that the rear facade is 45 units from across the street. we understand that any vertical addition will generate shadows. with the setbacks and the

orientation and location of the mpaps between the existing structures, we think that will not exist. in your packet, there are some shadow studies. in the wintertime, it is the worst. with regard to the neighbor adjustment to eliminate the top unit, please recognize that this is tucked in between two neighboring structures of similar height. it is modest and setback and consistent with its neighbors. they add character to the existing block and is a good example of urban influence. a lot of the people i have heard tonight speak about four stories in height. it is not all about