absolute must of the ongoing development of this effort. >> set backs, if i read through the design guidelines and throughout there he mentions the set backs and preserving the character of holding the privacy and light in the rest of the neighborhood. this is not just about the individual neighborhood, but a lot of bruce and his partner who has put a lot of his effort in pushing through this and it is also the character of the entire neighborhood and set backs as it should continue to go back and into this building and would hopefully put this thing, better in perspective and in scale with the rest of the neighborhood. we are not against the development, and we have had a lot of stories, and a lot of houses that have gone up in the last five years, but there does come a point where too much is four the neighbors that preserves its own character. thank you so much. >> are there any other speakers in support of the dr? come on up. >>

>> my name is gralin braille and i live at 615 duncan street and i would like to start by making a comment and i don't know how many of you are native san franciscans and i am not. i moved here 50 years ago and i originally lived in russian hill and i think that we would all, if you have been in the russian hill, i am sure that most of you have, you will recognize that it is a high density neighborhood and it has a different player than the valley does. the valley is most of the people here have talked about definitely has the charm of more of a single family or a family orientation. and it was what has been stated before, this is currently a eclectic neighborhood where there are a lot of homes, if you look on new berg street there are a lot of deco and you

have victorans and in bruce's case it is a more interesting more modern building that has definitely fit in with the way that it fits into the nature of the neighborhood. >> this particular building that you are looking to decide what you want to do today, is something that just kind of crosses the line the fifth story takes it to a place where it does not fit in with this neighborhood, and it is intended to live. and i think that most of us have lived there for some time already. i want to you look at it from that perspective and a comment was made earlier about, if you have not seen this neighborhood, or you have not looked at what the plan is and in actuality, what it looks like there, i invite you to come to the valley and we are more than happy to show you, that because i think that it makes a huge difference and thank you. >> thank you. >> >> thank you. >> i'm elaine gorson and i live

on 24th street and not anywhere near where any of the neighbors that have spoken today. but i do live in the valley, and i have lived there for 20 years and my heart breaks for these neighbors, because i know how i feel, about the valley and i know how most of the residents feel, and they feel that it has a very near and dear charm and that is why most of us live there. and so i hope that you will listen today to bruce, and the rest of the neighbors and not allow this building to go forward. and i thank you very much for your consideration. >> any other speakers in support of the dr requestor? >> >> seeing none, project sponsor?

>> my name is robert admonds and i am the architect working on behalf of the project sponsor and i want to thank you the commissioners for the time and consideration on this project and i would like to thank the staff who we worked closely with over the last couple of years on this project. as i mentioned it has been a couple of years, and we have met many times with the dr requestor, and we have also had all of the required identifications in terms of the preapplication meetings with the neighbors and also the 311 notification. we have not had any contact at all with any of the neighbors except for the dr requestor, and over the last couple of years in this project. and as of late, the dr

requestor has drummed up support from the neighbors, for this, or for his first cause and i think that in many ways he has misrepresented the project and in order to tell you what the project is, first i want to tell you what the project is not. >> the project is not a five story home, contrary to what he is representing. >> it is a four story house. >> it is four floors over a garage, and it is four stories over a garage. and in fact i think that another key consideration here is that this is a steeply sloped lot. and that is important because that differs from the flat lots and in fact, in terms of the way that the building code would determine this property, would actually be a three story building, with two subbasements this is very, very different than the described five story building that they are talking about. and another aspect to the project is that because it is a

steeply sloped site, we have gone to the efforts to terrace the project up the hillside, the project is in a 40 foot high limit because of the slope of the site and the average height is roughly about 35 feet and it is actually not 54 feet as represented by the dr requestor's material. and another key aspect to our project, that should be noted, is that with the terracing of the hillside the project is never two more stories above the adjacent grade and we have been deliberate of the design and 40 percent of the floor area is underground and a substantial portion of the building is buried underground to limit the mass of the building. as, as noted from a lot of people, this is an unusual property. and to the east, is the dr requestor's property, which is

a double-sized lot and it is a 50-foot lot and our project is 25 and to the west of us is a non-conforming lot. and the dr requestor, again, continues to represent our project as almost 5,000 square feet is true but that is also ininclusive of 1,000 foot of garage which is 90 percent khf is underground and so in terms of the actual living space, we are talking about a house that is nearly 3700 square feet and of that living space, 35 percent of it is underground. with regard to the set backs, we have maintain the co-compliant 25 percent of lot in the rear and we are matching the 25-foot front set back that is matching the neighbors and is identical to the neighbors and when we had the initial discussions with the dr requestor and he was actually surprised that we were not taking the average between the two properties and so in his mind he wanted to take the average of his property with regards to the house that is to

the west of us. and that actually will have required us to have a 42 foot floor set back, which will really be quite impressive and the other key thing that i would like to mention is the fourth floor, and the controversial fourth floor. the fourth floor is set back, 46 feet from the property line. and it is barely visible from the street, and it is really not quite that noticable. our approach to the design of this project was to carefully address the facade and we were concerned about the size and the scale of the project. and so what we have done is a series of voluntary set backs and not just up the front facade to articulate it and we are setting the garage back four feet. and we are also voluntarily matching the eastern property adjacent to the dr requestor's

house to some released to him. and other aspects that we are very careful to consider, is on the property line, walls, we are articulating those with the property line windows as well and the joint patterns. >> sir, your time is up. >> thank you. >> calling now speakers, that are in support of the project? >> good afternoon commissioners my name is elizabeth moore. i own a house to the west of the project on the other side from the dr requestor. and i don't live there at the moment i have a tenant who is also in support of the project. i met with the architect a number of times, and the project as it is now, considering the changes that have been made, i feel that it is reasonable. and i am happy with the results. so i would like to just go on record as supporting the project, thank you. >> thank you.

>> next speaker please? support of the project? >> my name is rebecca isenberg and i am a neighbor who lives one block away and i strongly support the construction and to be here and i don't know who the developer is, and it does not matter to me, that the developer wants to make money. in his background and i am one of the stroller moms and we bought a home ten years ago and we had to scrimp and save to buy this house and the neighborhood has changed over the years since we bought it, it has changed in very good ways and we are very grateful for the changes which have increased our value and some day might help us to afford college for our two children, but let's be very clear about what this dr request is about, it is about the request for one person to preserve his western views. and this one person spent $6 million to buy a mansion, unfinished about five years ago. he bought it next to an empty

lot. might i ask for consideration, why anyone would buy a home next to an empty lot in one of the most quickly aappreciating neighborhoods in the city and not consider buying that next door in order to preserve his views rather than purchasing the lot, is something that is still open to the dr requestor, he has spent his money on attorneys and now i am an attorney, and i like to make money too. but in this case, i leave that it is a waste of tax payer money to have you all sit here for a long time listening to his attorneys and the neighbors try to convince you that the home next door, the developer, that bought the home and the lot next door does not have a right to build a home almost as tall and half the size as his home. it is absolutely ludicris to say that it is out of character with the neighborhood when it is half of the size of the dr

requestor's home additionally the well researched and thoroughly report which i thank the commission for creating makes it clear that there is a home almost identical to the proposed home three doors to the right, you will see a white home that looks almost exactly like the proposed construction if norton that report and see it also by walking down the street. mostly, i thoroughly object to the aesthetic objections that the neighbors here have made to the proposed construction. might i point out that the developer, is building this house to sell it and to make money. and i highly doubt that an ugly home would make money for the developer. even in our quickly changing neighborhood. at the end of the day, in conclusion, i urge, this commission to approve the home as is, in its already negotiated form, as very clear

report makes it clear, and that it is already, you know, if it is already given concession and please i urge you is if we can consider dr reform so that the mission that may not go through this again, thank you. >> are there any speakers in support of the project. okay. and if not, dr requestor, you have a two-minute rebuttal. >> commissioners as my wife likes to say you can tell when the lawyers are speaking. we want to just point out a couple of things in response. one, this is, this dr is not about the dr requestor's home, it is already built for the record he did not build it, he did not have it constructed. he bought it as-is, so he came to the building. the second is that, given the

numerous opportunities to attend the project sponsor did not attend the neighborhood meeting. i don't know what went in and i know that the schedules are complicated and we are busy but if it were my client i would urge him to be there and in fact i have done that when i was been on the other side. >> many references to the building code and how the stories are counted and i just remind everyone that this is the planning commission and not the building commission. and the project starts 6 feet below the adjacent home, the dr requestor's home and rises to a level four feet above it so it is actually down the hill from the dr requestor's home. and which and it is still yet taller, at the end of the day. and lastly the planning code may be met. but the residential design guidelines have not been and we have laid it out clearly in our brief, we are here if you have

questions. >> project sponsor you have a two-minute rebuttal. >> we have worked wither closely with staff over the last three years and we have worked closely over the dr requestor over the last three years. all of the neighbors sentiment has come at us in the literally the last two weeks and we frankly don't think that it is fair. we have, the project has been reviewed by the residential design team on three occasions and it is code compliant and with the residential design guidelines and, we hope that you will approve the project as designed. thank you. >> okay. the public hearing is closed. and opening it up to commissioner comments and questions. commissioner antonini? >> thank you. >> interesting discussion and a couple of things that i think are pretty clear. never really concerned about the number of floors, we are

looking at the total height or the relationship of one building to the other and you could have a situation where one building is 6 floors and the other was 4 and they are virtually on the same level. and i think so, it is just symantics how many floors you are going to say this new project has. and a couple of things, i am a little concerned about the presentation of the project just because while the dr requestor's home has been keeping with the rest of the neighborhood, sort of differentiated between the concrete look on the lower floors, and more of a wood, and metal features on the uppers, the project sponsor's building seems to be a little bit boxy and stark, so i would like to see, if not, a change in the design, at least maybe, a little bit of a change in the

materials on the upper floor. and but, i don't really see any kind of large impact that the new building is going to have on the dr requestor's building other than the fact that is might cut out a little bit of the view. but some changes could be appropriate to the project and we will see what the other commissioners have to say and perhaps setting back what labeled as the third floor might make sense and all glass fronts and i am not sure presents it is best for this. and i think that there are aesthetic concerns in my mind that should be addressed by the building but i am not sure that it is form is out of line as far as size is concerned.

i think that ask i ask the response or a question, just about the front and i am a little confused as to kind of, that westernly wall, does that stick out father than the actual building? >> the front of the wall alines with the 15-foot set back. >> and the living space on the second and third floor are set back beyond that. >> there is a front balcony that is 30 inches deep and so the actual, is set back on the glass line is actually 17 foot, 6. >> and kind of the side line wall alines with the glass? >> no the front is pulled

forward to the front set back and that 15 feet and so we have done that to articulate it. >> and could you put up a picture of the front facade? >> sure. >> we can do it. >> that is the same thing. >> and so the first floor that you don't have a balcony. >> no, but the first floor that is labeled one is actually set back 20 feet from the front or from the front property line. >> and then as you go up, the second floor in >> it would be 17-6. >> and what is in that three feet? >> that is the balcony. yeah. >> and in that kind of framing of the building, that is out to where the balcony is. >> that is correct.

>> and so we have actually taken the steps to push the house back voluntarily, and create shadow lines and articulation on the facade. thank you. >> push i think that the project is well illustrated and i think that the staff has done a great job to understand the subtle guidance to the project and i emphasize in the neighborhood that a large building and where you all perceived an open space and has the building and that you have a reaction and it is just natural. and however, i do think that the staff's guidance to scope the building has a sensitivity and since the project is code compliant that i see that this one is a major thing that we have to consider here. i personally have a difficult time wanting to take the dr and shape it as a solid architect

expression and it is consistent with its own design and however, this is not a neighborhood where we have to design in context and the way that we might do it and in the richmond or in the other neighborhoods and it has really a strongly uni formed based and we don't have that year. >> and how you deal with the hillside and to meet up and meet the challenges of the adjoining heights is well done in this project. and so i personally do not have really anything against it and while i empathize to restate my point was the neighbors expressing the discomfort and concern of the building as it it is asked for the approval here does not have anything that is outside of the code or out of the guidelines as it has been i think, guided by the residential design team. >> >> commissioner sugaya? >> yes, i think that one thing that commissioner antonini mentioned was materials.

and part of, and i understand that the architecture, and the way that it is expressed, is probably best expressed in stucco which i think is the exterior and it is not concrete. and the use of wood may not be quite appropriate in this case in terms of the architectural design and i am trying to, and i am trying to think of a way to perhaps, lessen, maybe it is the rendering that makes the stucco in which you have the stucco painted white and maybe, with the staff you could work on that in terms of a color pallet that is not quite so, contracted with the neighborhood which i think is mainly wood framed buildings and smaller scale, perhaps. and woodsiding and singles and i don't know, and i don't know that neighborhood intimately. and your neighbor that the dr

requestor's building, has wood elements on it. but, i am not trying to get you to do with it or perhaps through some kind of a color pallet, you know, if it softened the effects so to speak. also in terms of what is before us, and we are looking at if we don't take dr, we are looking at a four story building because you have eliminated what would be the fifth story,; is that correct?? >> yeah, we understand that, i think. >> i am not inclined to take the dr. >> and the requests for the project architect. and so the one thing that makes it a little harsh looking is

the lines are kind of straight going back on the two sides and you have not taken advantage and there are some windows on the side of the dr requestor, but not much on the other side and there are not really any articulations and the dr request's building has articulations that softens it and i am not sure why you did not take advantage of putting it and i know of the property line windows but i would not expect the dr requestor to take out the stairway and fill it in but it seems like you would want to have the softening of the lines and maybe some more windows on that side. >> we did talk to the dr requestor about that and we are concerned about the property line facades and as mentioned previously the noe valley is an evolving neighborhood and it is

mixed character. there are empty lots even in the same lot and so it is likely that at some point in time that the neighbor to the west may do something with that property. and so, we did address the property line walls rather than just having the blank facade and likewise we were sensitive to the dr requestor in terms of having a blank wall to them and so we had offered many, and we thought that we could offer property lines and vegetation and things like that, but, beyond that, we are, you know, we realize that the neighborhood is changing. we are not sure how to address the property line walls other than what we have already done. >> what is the frontage across this house. >> 25 feet across. >> only 25, >> you are limited because i was thinking if you had a step somewhere there, and you had

windows that faced towards the front and then that could not be blocked in any case, even on the western side, because it would be facing there to let more light in to the house and soften it a little bit and i encourage you to continue to work with the staff to do what you can to differentiate the areas that from the second floor up, to look a little bit different from the lower parts of the building, to fit in with the house and not look like a solid block and i cannot see anything with the massing that we can't take dr on. >> i move to not take the dr and move the project as proposed. >> second.

>> all in favor? >> >> commissioners on the motion to not take dr, and approve the project as proposed antonini. >> aye. >> borden. >> aye >> hillis. >> aye. >> moore. >> aye. >> sugaya. >> aye. >> wu. >> aye. >> and fong. >> aye. >> so moved that motion passes unanimously, 7 to 0 and puts you on the final item on your agenda, which is public comment, and i have no speaker cards. >> is there any general public comment this evening? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. and i would like to close this meeting in memory of peter antonini. >> thank you. >> and i am going to try to make the event next week. >> great. >> the 18th of october. >> got it down. >> all right with that, the meeting is adjourned. >> thank you. >>

>> we are approving as many parks as we can, you have a value garden and not too many can claim that and you have an historic building that has been redone in a beautiful fashion and you have that beautiful outdoor ping-pong table and you have got the art commission involved and if you look at them, and we can particularly the gate as you came in, and that is extraordinary. and so these tiles, i am going to recommend that every park come and look at this park, because i think that the way

that you have acknowledged donor iss really first class. >> it is nice to come and play and we have been driving by for literally a year. >> it is kind of nice. >> all of the people that are here. ♪