stay in the city, but to enjoy the great amenities that the park has to offer. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> project architect. i want you to know i'm available for questions if you have them. thank you. >> good evening, luke o'brien, coalition for responsible growth. also, i -- a fellow commissioner on the small business commission for the purposes of disclosure. contrary to something that was suggested earlier, the sponsors are for the outside attempting to make a fast buck. i thought that was a bit unfortunate. kind of paradoxical when i'm hearing testimony from members of -- of the city and county of san mateo and from fellows that don't even live in san francisco.

that's kind of ironic that on the same side would be classifying others as outsiders who are actually commissioners, serving like yourself. that be it, as it play, i -- may, i would like to read a letter from a member of the naked. it is worded as follows. i have carefully reviewed the section 311 neighborhood notification drawings that were mailed to me. i support the project as proposed at 3739 lloyd street. specifically i support details such as the fourth floor, the stairway penthouse decks and variance requests to remain unmodified. moreover my own property at 1 scott street is four stories and 40 feet tall has a penthouse and rear yard and rooftop decks. it spans my lot with a zero rear yard setback, my property among many other properties on the block with its noncannot forming character is an important example of a substantial property right that will not be

preserved and enjoyed by 3739 lloyd street and the request is not granted to that project. indeed to paper tape neighborhood character, the variance must be granted at 3739 lloyd street. please approve the project as proposed, respectfully benecol lynns, number 1 scott street. i would add that i thought that the -- that the photographs were -- were somewhat strategic in their presentation. the photograph that was showing the roof over the neighbor's house, and then the photograph that showed what it would look like with just three stories, the -- the proposed project basically disappeared and it was taken from a very strategic vantage point. i think if you were to just walk down that street knowing nothing about the history of the hearing that you heard tonight that referenced new zealand and everywhere else and took a guy in and sent him walking down the

street along the sidewalk because this thing is set back so well from the sidewalk, he probably wouldn't observe the building this as it is. it will affect the neighbors directly there. that's a function of math and fizz section. there's nothing we could do about that. thank you. >> good evening commissioners. my name is ted lownburg, i'm a member of the hate ashbury improvement association. i want to talk to you about the prooge he can't as well. i support the project. i think it is a -- a welcome addition to the community. i want to say first, i -- i took offense frankly at the demonizing here of todd and kevin in their efforts to build housing. the comments about dark and monster homes, et cetera were just over the top and really had no place in this discussion. people wanted to dispute the merits of this fine, but -- really, unnecessary to -- to

demonize this in such a negative way. housing as you know is the -- is the critical issue in this city. it -- it comes up again and again and people who build more housing are solving that problem. that's what these men are doing. they played by the rules. they worked with the neighbors over a extended period of time to change and accommodate the building to their concerns. you know, the world has changed since -- since -- in the last 100 years, we don't build the little victorian cot tanls anymore for a variety of -- variety of reasons, economic among them. it is also important to note that the -- that the med dal senior -- medical center nearby wants to establish a -- a world class stroke agreement center at that campus. and in order to do that, you also have to have some things happen around, you have to have

a vibrant community that provides services that -- that are needed by people who live there and work at that facility. you have to have housing, quality housing that will attract that kind of top quality professionals who will be working at that facility and that is what this -- that's what this house will do. it'll be -- serve as an atwractive place for people that want to be at that -- that davies center. you know, i think -- generally we -- we, the concept that we can't go forward in san francisco was presented here. we have to sort of stop everything and freeze it in its place. that just doesn't fly in terms of the development that this city has to go through in the long-term. todd and kevin had been doing the right thing. they have been playing by the rules, they -- they really are adding to -- to san francisco and -- you know, the -- taking the oy taking a d.r. on this

request would only prove that no good deed goes unpunished. i urge you to -- to reject the d.r. on this. thank you. >> daniel fernandez. i'm a realtor and i'm seek -- speaking to this project today from the real estate perspective and a perm perspective having known kevin and todd for several years and seeing the projects they have built in the area at large. what i like to say is they develop a high quality standard of housing and it is the kind of project, it is in short supply in the neighborhood, it does draw families and in the end, my belief is their work has brought net positive value to the neighborhood. i urge you to support the project.

>> good evening. thank you for taking the time to hear me. thank you for taking the time to hear me. i'm here -- my name is will ohio and i have been san franciscan for about 10 years. and -- i live in this -- this south of market area. and in the 10 years that i been here, i -- i become the uncle of many unrelated kids. that's my main concern that san francisco is a city that only welcomes couples, single people and people that can live in two bedroom units. and when i see a neighborhood like this that has parks that i use often, with my dog and my friend's kids and that has facilities like a hospital and the medical center and the art center, i would like to see more units this -- that can accommodate not large families but more than one kid. ? we use -- we use the size of this -- these apartments or

condos it will be mostly for small families and we want to see more kids. we want to see a more vibrant community. we want to see more diversity. and that is all i wanted to say. i would like to see these type of units, more welcome to large families or mid size families. >> hello,. my name is kevin chang. in the interest of disclosure, i like to speak twon items. i'm a commissioner on public utilities com pigs and for -- for -- for the instance of my friend danny fernandez, he is a friend. he's a realtor, however, he's not a broker representing our projects. in the interest of full disclosure. what i like to do to round out the conversation tonight is -- to reintroduce the following

graphic. and let's take a bit of tile to look at the density and the mass and the scale of buildings in this neighborhood. it is considerable. i don't think any of these neighbors can say their house is small. their house is clean, their house is so sizeably different than what is being proposed on the project. in fact if you were to see the three dimension drawings that we provide that show our project, it will be one of the smaur ones in the neighborhood based on the visual satellite photo that you can see. look at -- across the street right here. built, lot line to lot line. massive. no setbacks what solver. look across the street uphill. massive. a setback on the side. nonthat could be said to not detract from the mass and nature

of the buildings. i want to have the commission play a particular attention to that. next i like introduce the group to the commission, the scale of the building, the height of the building, excuse me. what has been noticed here by some of the supporters of the d. rflt applicants is that this building will stand out and it would not conform to the topography of the street. what i like to point out is this has a 21-foot setback. the building is set back six feet and the fourth floor set back 15. when you compare that to the building up here, you could see clearly our building on. fourth floor is lower.

than that building. it is following the topography of the street when it is lower than the uphill buildings, that's following the topography. i like to mention another point. there are two that weighed in on the height of the building and the relation to the neighborhood. that's the residential design team and the major environmental analysis team if the historical resources evaluation report and both of them have said separately that the project as proposed preserves the scale of the street. i ask you to approve the project about joop stay with the project. if not d.r. requesters you have two minutes. >> joe butler rebutting for ann. first i like to ask the supporters that came tonight

from lloyd street but did not speak to raise their hand. the neighbors from lloyd street don't have financial interest in real estate for development and they live in the neighborhood. we would like you to take d.r. tonight. i think we demonstrated that the scale of the building is out of context with its neighbors. we like you to limit the height to three stories. we like you to match the light well if chris volcker's house. it is a new building. even larry badener would say you don't grant variances for a -- new buildings. they're meant for buildings that can't comply for one reason or another. we like you to submerge the roof access and step the property lines back and require roof assemblies so we could eliminate pair puts to hold the height down.

in my brief, we offered to trade the five-foot side setbacks and the popout in the back for the -- for the -- for the top floor. other neighbors prefer that not to happen. we leave it in your hands, we hope you'll take discretionry review. thank you so much. >> sue hester. i want to draw your attention to the outline in the final plans where finally the staff said, you have to show the stuff on the roof. this is the only drawing. i'm astonished that coming into this hearing what you're hearing from sponsor is is totally misleading information on

heights. don't they learn the height of this building which is 25 by 25-foot print is 4 feet. not the height they say. there is only going to be four feet 3 1/2 inches. this is mr. vol kerr's building, his building is 21 feet high under the planning code. they still have as 32 feet seven inches and they talk about it as though this doesn't exist and they have the correct heights. you need to look at in terms of how it blows through the residential design guidelines. what i like to offer on the variances, as mr. butler said, the most residents is willing to take a two-story pop-up that goes lot line to lot line. how often have you heard that?

people make those offers. he doesn't want to husband privacy. he said they could have the volume. we're saying that one of the alternatives is to increase the variance to allow them to do two stories of 12-foot popout in exchange for no fourth floor and a submerged -- submerged entrance stair way to the roof. he's 15euing, it is okay to have a roof deck. that's pretty generous. you pitched battles on that all the time. we're say, they could have the square feet and go lotline to lot line. as along as they get rid of the story and do not infringe on their neighbor's privacy. thank you. just a couple of points. the -- the sponsor is -- presentations tonight basically repeated everything they said before. we have clearly shown -- as sue

said, you don't measure heights at the peek. trying to compare a building they want to build on lloyd street to something on cass strow or scott, streets twice as wide as ours and many of them are -- are flat as well, it is just not appropriate. i think in regards to their strong neighborhood support that they're trying to claim, i think our -- our output tonight as well as the letters and -- if you see the map of where our support is, i think it is cheer that the -- that the neighborhood is behind the d.r. requesters. finally, they -- they said that they think our renderings are stwreak, i tried to show it from -- strategic -- i tried to show you from every vantage point. i show you a different drawing. this was done by the developer's architect. it is kind of -- which clearly shows how much taller it is than the other buildings.

so, if -- if we are doing a strategic rendersion, i don't think they could say the same about this one. if there are other rendersion they like to see, could generate them. thank you for your time and -- please support the d.r. request. thank you. >> sponsor. >> commissioners, i like to remind you that the neighbors, the d.r. requesters have not proven or shown any extraordinary or exceptional circumstances that warrant taking d.r. these also point out that elizabeth street which you heard tonight is a far steeper street than lloyd street. lloyd street is a walkable street. some of you have walked it. i also like to point out that the neighbors have never disputed the fact that we met the various priority and planning and housing element that is are important to san francisco. and also the importance of

providing family sized housing with three bedrooms in each unit. they never deny the fact it is impossible to achieve that goal. with a three-story structure. i also like to point out there are penthouses in a -- one-block radius of the project. there's nine within a one block radius. this image is in your packet. again, regarding the overall scope and size of buildings, compared to others within the neighborhood, as well as -- as the architect mr. butler, for the -- the neighbors tried to claim the alleys of the neighborhood are so unique, they prove they're three-story structures here. this is not true, on lloyd street, there's a four-story -- it doesn't show up on the overhead. this is a four-story 40-foot tall building on lloyd street. there's another one. at the corner of lloyd street and scott street. 40 feet tall. there's another one on the other

corner of lloyd street and scott street. 40 feet tall. and finally, on the allyways that they refer to. there are two new buildings that were recently approved on gar mania street and pond street, four-story buildings with a fourth story setback. there are numerous others to point to near the park, many others. and in fact, i think the architect hired by the neighbors actually approved the point that this building is in character with the neighborhood. and we appreciate your support. >> commissioners, i usually don't do this but please, when your -- your comments we still have to get the cars out of the garage. >> commissioner? >> i want to be brief saying i've been sitting here for almost two hours in the room where everybody speaks english but they're -- there had are two large groups of people that don't speak to each other and don't understand each other. for that purpose, i like the

architect to please come to the podium, i have a couple of questions for you. >> are you the person that designed the building? >> yes. >> would you describe to the commission what your task was, what is the objective, the client has given you to design the building? >> the residential units to fit in the neighborhood. >> what else? >> family sized units. >> how do you describe that? >> three bedroom units. >> would you give us the philosophy by which you understand the site, the circumstances and, et cetera. would you dri that to us, that we fully appreciate why you designed what you did? >> -- the intent is not to duplicate the victorian architecture and create a ginger bread style and design in a modern language with the current building materials and tech followings that ev with today, so -- designing a -- a modern residential building, with

energy efficient -- >> could you be a less -- a little less generic, can you kind of see what you saw next door to the left, to the right across the street. let's -- >> typical, typical -- on our side of the street, there's typically residential entries. garage doors on the left-hand side. we matched that pattern on the garage door on the downhill portion. a raised entry with steps up -- sort of similar to either neighbor on both sides. and -- sort of, you -- using the same design language as the existing historic buildings but in a -- in a modern design context, for the duplicating the same sort of victorian style. >> i'm not trying to put you on the spot. i'm trying to have you explain in a convincing way of why this -- this -- why this is a building which we should be approving. perhaps one or two more sentences.

i personally do not see -- do not see a response to -- to the circumstances in can you're designing. >> i want to reiterate what i said. i'm not sure more specifically what you're getting to. mask the context of the neighbors and the design guidelines of how the pattern of the residents are by in a modern language and contemporary style, contemporary materials and two residential unit that is are family sized. >> i'll let the other commissioners ask questions before i respond, so more opportunity for you to make your point. thank you. >> commissioner sugaya. commissioner sugaya: so long as you're up, i have questions. the lower unit, these are three bedroom younts, then why have you labeled one bedroom as an office? >> there is an office on the lower unit because it is -- it is windows are on the property

line. >> there's a bedroom on the bottom floor. >> two on the main floor i think. commissioner sugaya: then the second floor there are one bed something labeled aboffice -- an office. >> you're correct. commissioner sugaya: so we have one two and one three. >> correct. commissioner sugaya: in your concept of family housing, the upper floor includes a family room. i'm just trying to get if we're going to play elizabeth street here. there seems to be -- some compromises that can be made spacewise to accommodate a two or three bedroom unit. depending on whether or not we bite even suggest to the -- to the z.a. -- further encroachment. which -- which i'm not too happy about in the first place.

but you know, who knows. i'm playing with ideas that. that's all. >> you don't have to answer that. >> commissioner antonini. >> i may have questions for you, but i also have ideas. my ideas is this. number one, i think it is important-to-the two, what i thought to be three bedroom younts, it hooks like one is a two. i like to see them. we said you needed to do two threes, so you got to do two threes. that can be done. i do think that it is probably a -- essential to have some what of a fourth floor to make that happen because -- because of the way you're doing it. but i think what you would have to do to make it fit in with the neighborhood is -- if i were designing it, i would put the gables on the top where the fourth floor is similar to what denuncio has. you got a gable that runs north south and one that runs east

west. on the east west gable two bedrooms and one bath. on the north south gable, you put your master bedroom and your other master bath. i think that would work and what that does is even though you would be higher than the other structures on either side, it would make it appear to be lows of a box, it would appear to be more in keeping with the rest of the naked, because you would have gables that are similar to what almost all of the other -- all the other houses have, they're all edwardian or victorian in style. i understand the need for space. i don't want you to necessarily create something that is a copy of the other houses, i think in matching what you need to do is to mass in a way that it doesn't tick up -- stick up like a sore thumb in the milled because it is too tall. you also have to get rid of the deck on the top. so what you end up with is two

three bedroom units with the two car packing with -- parking with maybe the deck could be on the third floor. or off the third floor perhaps. perhaps you could do you could do two three bedroom units. i think you need a partial third floor. >> commissioner borden bored bore i don't know if he wants to react to that. many victorian buildings is floot roofs. on the street there's many. >> in this instance given the fact that it is sticking up beyond -- beyond it, it is somewhat ameal rate that is by having the pitch.

>> i think you need to have the gabled roof. the problem with the building, it is big and boxy. it just really stands out on a very near row street, 29 feet which is a very, very -- you know, small street by its standards. we policies about -- about heights of buildings and protecting alleyways. that's one big thing. also the street slopes and you're going to be taller than the building uphill. the penthouse and everything on top. it is a huge enormous building in the context of much smaller and shorter buildings. it is not so much -- if it was just the fourth floor, that would be one thing but then the penthouse on top makes it look giant. and then the issue on a brand through building is exactly. it is a stand ashed lot size is 25 by 100 feet. if you had an unusual lot size, it would be -- i would napped

but because it is not furble hot size and technically variances are sufficiently granted in exceptional and extraordinary circumstances as well. i think you do have a -- there's an issue here that the building is designed that way. so, those are the issues that i have. i don't want to redesign the inside of your building, if not, that's not my job. my job is just the footprint of the building but right now the matching of the building, it makes the building overwhelm the street and the neighborhood and the the context of this. so i don't have the best suggestion on how we fix that, but i would say that you know, we need to figure out how to make it less boxy and less imposing to the neighborhood. >> mora. >> i believe that this building in order to be removed or compatible because among a large number of homes which are all traditional homes. this is a modern design and maximum height cannot exceed three throors and i think in terms of of sidelines it needs

to respect a number of other things -- i think this building should probably go back and -- and rethink of how the space is allocated. i suggest that we stick with the mandate of -- of finding a way for the three bedrooms. that's fine by me. but this house is intentionly oversized and wouldn't -- when we move into a neighborhood only -- on a hot, there's a prevailing participate. on the other hand, i complain point to five houses away and say they have more than i do. that's not the way it works. i think it is a collective impression which allows you to have some sometimes more or less and lets you design an house. it meets an average. you're not gaining more, from my perspective, i believe this is immediate oakener design, you're lowering the value of the 0 adjoining buildings. sorry to be crude. and it is not good modern design.