side of the room. >> you can start speaking, sir. thank you, commissioners. first of all, thank you for approving a project that i waited three years to get to this point, [speaker not understood] on the consent calendar. appreciate that. after three years. i decided to stay an extra four hours because i am a character witness for darren rishwayne who i've known his entire life. he is a fine neighbor and can't believe that they have to go through what they're going through in order to, what is obviously just maintain the condition that allows their home to have appropriate light -- >> sir, are you speaking in favor of the project? absolutely in favor -- no, i'm actually in favor of darren's position. darren's position in protecting his light and air. and, so, the effort that he had to go through to do something

that should be obvious to anybody that wants to live in that house today or tomorrow is, is unfortunate. and, so, to me it was worth it to spend four hours listening to all of the wonderful things that you folks listen to every week. ~ to support him as a character witness and to say that please accept his position which is to prevent the expansion of a large home already in san francisco that eliminates all the light and air of his neighbor. thank you. hi, my name is [speaker not understood]. i'm speaking in opposition of the project. i have been a resident of the marina for 20 years and i view this not as just a precedent setting case, but i view it as a significant step along what i believe is a trend that's been

occurring as long as i've been living in the marina, which is to allow bigger houses on small lot spaces that were never intended to be occupied by such big houses. we personally had a situation several years ago where we were promised that the project sponsor immediately to our east would not encroach on our light and safety. and when the ultimate house got built, it was twice its original size and, in fact, the entire east side of our house was blocked. and to make matters worse, the property line is encroached upon so that we have no exit for our children. we have two daughters and we now have no exit on a breezeway that used to run through our house which obviously in the marina is critical given the seismic issues. so, i think what i would ask the commission is we respect --

in our case we respect that our neighbor's right to build and encourage that and we oppose the idea of expansion, but i think there is a run away trend in the marina which was never intended to have such large houses and such intrusive projects and ones that block light and air to so many. i think it is a fair time to ask the commission to pause and think about what the marina was originally intended for, the type of structures and houses it was intended to be there and light and air that all of us are entitled to and we need to protect. thank you. good afternoon, president fong and members of the commission. i am here in full support of darren and pam rishwayne. i am a resident of the marina and live on [speaker not understood] street and have been a resident of the marina 12 years and of the city for 28 years.

i chose the marina 12 years ago because it was always my dream to live there just because of the ambience and all of the wonderful young families who keep all of us young and vibrant in the city. in fact, in the marina, even later this month, it will be [speaker not understood], it's all about families. so, i'm here to support them. and i've been in their lovely home and i know that if this project goes through, they will be plunged into darkness in their beautiful dining room and kitchen. thank you for the consideration. good afternoon, commissioner. i am alan silverman. i am a 29-year resident of the marina and i moved to the marina because it had a special character. and i would ask you

specifically to, when considering these variances or request variances, to consider article 10 of the planning code which specifically finds that areas of special character of which the marina is clearly one, continue to be unnecessarily destroyed. and the problem that i think we're dealing with is the incremental problem of a variance here, a variance there, a variance there, and pretty soon what all of the gardens in the marina are going to be concrete. the subject property at 3700 broderick that we're talking about, it already has a variance in the backyard which is going to be extended even further and a variance in the side yard which is going to take away more garden. and i was walking this morning along jefferson street at the opposite end at webster and there is another requested variance that was going to come

in front of this commission in the next few weeks for someone to build in nigh backyard. the marina has a special character. those of us that move there move there because of that character. and by allowing one variance at a time for people to replace yards, side yards, back yards, green space with concrete is going to destroy the character that article 10 of the planning code asks you specifically to protect. so, i would ask you not just to consider your action in this, but consider the accumulative action you may take when you grant all of these variances and you will eventually concrete over the whole of what was supposed to be marina gardens. thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is pam [speaker not understood] and i'm a marina

resident for the last 18 years. one of the many positive attributes of the marina is that there is a very limited and coveted pocket of the side -- side and rear gardens which incorporate light, air, and open space. and as a marina resident, i totally value this. i walk all the time and walk my dog all the time and that's one thing that we are seeing less and less of. so, the adjacent neighbors have already acted, i believe, in very good faith and very neighborly by already not opposing the additional height requirements on 3700 broderick street. please hear the marina neighbors and residents that are already here in support of these neighbors and limit the mcmansions that are trying to be built or already have been

built on the limited property in the marina. please do not allow the side yard construction. thank you. >> are there any other speakers in support of the d-r? in support of the d-r. that would be opposed to the proposed project. good afternoon, commissioners. i am jeanette [speaker not understood]. i live in -- i'm a native san franciscan and i have lived in the nafor over 50 years, okay. as a marina district resident, i want to voice my opposition in part -- to part of the proposal at 3700 broderick street. i understand the neighbors are not opposed to an enlargement of this home on its interior, but they are opposed to additions into the rear and side yard. the marina side yards are one

of this neighborhood's beautiful and unique features. they provide view corridors and natural sunlight to neighboring properties. many of them are landscaped and raised for the entire neighborhood and passersby, tourists to enjoy. i don't understand the variance aspect of the proposal. i thought a variance was only supposed to be grant in truly exceptional circumstances to give the applicant something he really can't do without in order to live a normal life in his building. it cannot be a hardship to live in a four-story 3,000 plus square foot home in the marina. it's not a hardship to not have a second laundry room added into your rear garden. it's not a hardship not to have a new deck when you already have a deck and a very large

roof deck besides. if the city's residential design guidelines are intend today provide meaningful preservation of the neighborhood's unique characteristics, these side yards and backyards must be respected in the same way as [speaker not understood] and footprints are. i hope you will maintain our beautiful marina garden area. thank you. >> if those people -- you can come up to the podium. those people lined up blocking the door, you are creating a fire hazard so i need to ask you guys to line up on this side of the room, please. could you line up on this side of the room, please? closest to the monitors. on the opposite side of the room, please. >> this is like the ice rink. >> thank you. my name is ford sibley, senior. you already spoke to my son, floyd, jr. and i'm opposed to

the project. everything pretty much has been talked about. there is kind of a main issue here. this is one of largest -- the the project is one of largest houses in area already. already. and i can feel the pain they want to president hu an elevator in. but they already have the largest house. the elevator -- a commercial residence elevator only needs to be 12 square feet. that can easily take up a house that's already bigger than almost twice the the size of our house next door at 37 08. so, it was really -- i don't think -- i know they said we need an elevator that's why we want to go the side yard. they don't need to do that. they have plenty of room. it's the largest garage in the neighborhood. it's the largest house in the neighborhood. it's huge. they don't need to be any bigger. also, just really quick, just show this here. on the original plans they show a house, the addition over here. to be three stories.

it's only two stories. so, i can show you a picture of it. i'm a rookie doing this. this is how it really looks. it's only two stories high with a deck. that's our house. in their plans they show three stories. it's not three stories. i just want to clarify that part. the main thing was about the elevator. they have plenty of room inside that house. thank you very much. >> thank you. good afternoon. my name is [speaker not understood]. i am here to support the rishwains in their denial of the variance that the parties at 3700 broderick would like to have. i am a realtor at pacific union international and we see

beautiful houses all the time. we also see a lot of houses that somehow seem to be too big for a lot and some that seem like they are the poor little sister next door. and in this case the rishwains have a beautiful home. it has beautiful charming mediterranean aspects to it, as does the home that's on the corner with different type of characteristics. i am only here to say that in addition to everything that has already been brought up, but if you walk into the house that the rishwains own, you will immediately -- and i'm just saying this from the perspective of every single seller and buyer who i have ever represented and i have been in the business for over

15 years, that the light and air is the most important thing. i have never heard one person say that they wanted to move to a dark house. so, what your immediate process is going into this house is to be drawn to the west part of this house, which is on the lightwell -- excuse me, it's a lightwell, it's the light source that there is in this house. if that is taken away with the exposure that this has -- that they have, which is north and south, they will have almost complete darkness, which seems like a hardship for most people to endure. and i think that the larger house next door at 3700 is a beautiful home. i've admired that house for as long as i've lived in the marina. i think those people enjoy lovely space and probably have the room to expand within, without encroaching on the light and air space that the

rishwains have. in closing i am here again just to support all the efforts and all the people who are here to do the same. thank you very much for your time. hi, my name is elaine gabriel. i've been a resident in the marina for 25 years. and i'm here to support jerry and pam. everyone keeps describing the side yard that faces jefferson street as a rear yard and the side yard that faces broderick street as the rear yard. but i'd like to suggest that maybe it should be the other way around. on a corner lot, the planning department determine where the rear yard is. not only the front is the narrow side of the lot and the rear is the opposite of that. but in this case a substantial open space is opposite the wide lot dimension. on jefferson street and the area opposite the narrow side on broderick is already built up.

there are interpretations that use the existing open area to determine where the rear yard is in order to make sure that the open space is preserved. by identifying the already built-up part of the lot as the rear yard, the planning department is saying the whole lot is buildable. i think in this case [speaker not understood] the broderick side yard is the required rear yard and then to find a proposal for looking at, which is what is reasonable to build in the jefferson side yard. you still wouldn't want to see the side yard entirely built out because of the set up. i've been in their home many times and it's beautiful and the light is one of the things that makes that home beautiful. but maybe perhaps the minor pop-outgoing further than 5-1/2 feet away from that property could work. so long as there's no construction in the true rear yard on broderick street. and i just want to say that i think it would be a shame to

ruin a lovely home. >> next speaker, please. commissioners, my name is bill gabriel and i've been a resident of the marina district for over 50 years. i live in the marina specifically because i love the beauty and the neighborhood charm of that marina. it is amazing how many changes i've seen through the years while maintaining the natural character of the neighborhood. when i heard of the proposal and how it it was going to compromise the original architectural design, i became interested and i am in opposition to the new design. when i walk my dog through the neighborhood and to chrisy field, it is obvious that the design of the marina was based on a pattern. these patterns of side yards consist of open corridors that allow the light and air to be passed between buildings. this is a charm that you don't find in many of the other districts in san francisco.

when the circumstance of 3700 broderick promising with the side yard be like a compromising [speaker not understood], if you will. it just doesn't make sense. the full width is in need to reflect the pattern on the block. the full width is also needed to make up the already built up backyard and the full width of the side yard is needed to provide adequate light and air for the adjacent buildings. i have looked at the rear yards of all three homes. if you saw them, you would recognize that this side yard makes up for the loss of the rear yards. these lots are shorter than those on the rest of the block. by approving side yard construction, the planning department is setting a very dangerous precedent for the marina district. the side yard construction needs to be denied. in the sense of compromise, they have agreed to allow the fourth floor construction. they also hired an architect to

come up with a design which would help their neighbors accomplish what they want to do within the envelope of the home. thank you. ladies and gentlemen of this board, my name is manuel baroka. i'm an old timer in this city and a long-time resident of the marina. i'm very concerned about how easily one can get a variance without taking into consideration how this building addition and alterations can affect the next door neighbors or even the entire area. to my knowledge, these folks have a 3,000 square feet home with a large house designed for

a family to live comfortably. and what they want to do within the inside of that house is their own business and their privilege. however, adding an elevator to the outside of the building will have a tremendous impact on their neighbors. it will reduce the latter's property value, will lock them in, it will block the light of one of the neighbors' windows, and it will alter their air and garden space. in my building on 3rd street, i built an elevator large enough for four people in the area on the inside of the building. it changed very little of the

interior area when the elevator shaft was built. it seem to me that they can do the same thing without affecting their neighbors while limited in space in this city of san francisco, and every bit of garden area is considered special. i thank you for listening, and let's hope we can keep the marina as green as possible. thank you very much. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is [speaker not understood] and i've lived in the marina for eight years. everyone that lives here understands that the landscaping and open side yards are as important to the neighborhood as the character of the buildings. i'm going to show you some

photographs of landscaped side yards to let you see how wonderfully they look in the neighborhood. this is a -- you can kind of see it there. this is a home between 62 1 and 627 marina. this is the side yard between 6 69 and 675 marina. this is actually right across the street from my home and this is 37 34, 3736 broadway -- i'm sorry, broderick, and it's the backyard of 6 99 marina. ~ and this right here is the

side yard between 37 33 and 37 37 rick broderick. i'd like to say i purchased my home eight years ago in the marina. the main reason i bought it was because of a lot of natural light ~ and just being able to look out of the windows. at that time i didn't have children. i do have two kids now. one is 18 months and one is five years. regardless, they look out of my windows all the time. they're always looking out there and they're looking at the beautiful natural landscape of the marina and our street and the marina to the back forward. so, i'm here to support pam and darren and thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. thank you for your time. my name is [speaker not understood] and i'm a resident of the marina. i live a couple blocks away. i want to talk about the variance and opposing the project. the whole point of the design

guidelines especially in the review process is to look at issues that are not regulated [speaker not understood] regulated by [speaker not understood] standards when there is something about the side or it's complex to know the [speaker not understood]. here we have a very unusual circumstance, a block with unusually large lot with -- to accommodate open side yards and three corner lots that are all designed around a single side yard. if this is a circumstance that merits the [speaker not understood], i don't know what else would. it's truly unusual situation. which brings into question why we should have design guidelines and the d-r process if we aren't going to use them. three feet is the standard building code. [speaker not understood] setback at least three feet requires special fire rate of construction. to randomly apply the building code standard to [speaker not understood] design patterns and issues is both the easy way out

[speaker not understood] the situation in this case. there is no relationship to the pattern on the block or the situation of the immediate adjacent properties. the setback was designed at 8 feet because the lot was even a 33 feet width to accommodate the normal width building and an eight-foot side yard. secondly, the minimum side yard on the block is 8 feet. the primary light and air to the two adjacent buildings comes from the side yard. the builder has already taken up most of the rear yard with construction to provide for the bulk of the lot's open space and the side yard instead of the rear yard. a three-foot side yard would mean that it would be breaking the normal pattern of building width by allowing a 30 foot

wide building adjacent to homes that is 20 feet wide. ignoring the pattern of side yards in the block which is [speaker not understood] width of 8 feet. and this unique contextual design around the side yards is important to the residents of the adjacent homes, to the neighborhood or the city when in fact it is such a unique situation we should focus our efforts on reviewing this and not preserving. thank you for your time. hello. my name is kimberly crowder and i'm a resident of the marina. i live at 1935 jefferson street. i share many of the thoughts and sentiments of the other marina residents. for me, like pam, i have a small child. i'm a mom. the kitchen is where i spend most of my time.

i enjoy opening my windows, letting the air, light, and circulation permeate. i cannot imagine a large brick wall being constructed to completely obscure any view i could possibly have. i consider a home a sanctuary, but this is not about money. it's not about a quality of life. and i'm not fortunate enough to own a yard or a garden and i live in a small space. i can definitely appreciate the other gardens and spaces and gardens that people have for me and my child. thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is darren [speaker not understood]. i'm an architect here in san francisco. i've been brought in by the d-r requestors and the neighbors to present some certain documents some of which you already have, others you don't which i'd like to give to you now.

and these represent some studies that were done on the property. ~ sun studies the first set of documents i wanted to talk about were the floor plans that you've already received. i'd just like to be clear that these floor plans aren't represented to be a substitute design for the project. it's obvious with some difficulty to take a much larger [speaker not understood] and shrink within that all the problematic requirements and make it work. however, i think the floor plans in general show that with some obvious trade-offs, a fit is possible to stay within the existing building envelope. i'm only going to show you the ground floor level. the floor levels are fairly similar. the trade-offs that you see are the depth of the garage which is deep enough for a couple

navigators, suvs, and the clearances around the stair are held to a minimum of three feet wide which for stairs still fine, considering the open space that wraps around it. the elevator works all the way through the core of the building. it's a much smaller elevator than what they have proposed, but it certainly fits a wheelchair and can work. and again, there's room enough in this existing footprint to move around certain thing within this program to try to make either a larger elevator or -- well, it's always going to be a trade-off to try to get a fit using their existing program if all of the features are required. the second set of information is a little bit clear and speaks for itself which are the sun studies. they're taken for each of the

four solstickes. [speaker not understood], march and september are pretty similar. the red indicates the new shadows created by the addition which it's obvious that they do have impact on the window system to the north. now, i wanted to point out particularly during the summer months there's a fair built of light being blocked for that neighbor to the north and all of his windows essentially. the winter months, not so much. actually, very little impact at all which one might argue makes -- when they do have sunlight available to be that much more important. what's not represented clearly in these documents is the impact of the light on pam and darren's property. >> sir, your time is up. thank you. >> thank you.