we're quite concerned about the proposed structure of the new building. i agree it is too big i think that this fourth level penthouse with the roof-deck will also have a negative impact the noise and the privacy of our neighborhood. i live about two houses uphill from the proposed site and people are on the roof-deck a they'll directly see into my living room and one of my bedroom windows where my little daughter is sleeping i'm concerned that is an impact on our privacy and also concerned about the potential noise so in enclosure i'd like to ask you, please request the removal of the fourth floor with the

penthouse and the roof-deck to make that house better suitable for the neighborhood thank you for your consideration >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner president wu and commissioner and members of the public i'm jim lynch my own reside on the street we speak as a resident of noah valley in my lifetime i'll lived in the neighborhood and attended noah valley and worked in retail establishment prior to coming and resident of 31 years at the police department after the marriage we resided in noah valley we raised our children you, however, in 1985 we

couldn't afford the plan and purchased a home in daily city we reasonable finally to return to noah city i've observed the transformation of the neighborhood from a thrilling and affordable middle-class neighborhood because of the good weather noah is a good city, however, we're concerned there's a trend toward building resident that are excessive in scale and mass the project on duncan is a prime example and many of us are concerned such 1r789 will be untrophy. like other community stakeholders that have spoken or will speak i'm here to urge you

to order the project sponsor to remove the penalty how did it is only an entertainment venue that is excessive and out of scale, however, a 4 story structure is not to the size and scale of the properties in the neighborhood as public standards i urge you to listen to the concerns the community and that allows the building of a four story home when is reasonable in size and scale the current proposal is not acceptable thank you for your time and we order the penthouse be removed >> thank you. as the next speaker comes up i'll call the next names >> (calling names). >> i'm petting are a i live

with my husband and 3 beautiful daughters i'm here to share with the commission my opinion of the duncan street and urge you to take discretionary review we're not anti development we understand the developer has bought this house to build something berlin or bigger and the roof-deck a s is a key issue that can't be considered they're not complimentary to the neighborhood when you look at the street and the house where they're proposing if didn't match anything around it so when you look at the duncan street neighborhood there are one or two over story garage and mostly all peaked roofs why woe would we have this monster religious

house. as you've heard it is duncan hill and everyone needs to check their brakes that's how steep is it so. i want to remind the planning department require the removal and a compromise was made the proof they've offered this is something that is getting loud the commission is approving it i building the photographs were from fat street you spent you can't see it as in our street you can definitely see it all the decisions are subjective but i want you to remember the 437 duncan has been relieded with

multiple red tags area their failure to post of the meeting we were supposed to have to say the word the commissioners used was reprehensible >> duncan street is a wonderful cul-de-sack and we have over one hundred signatures saying we don't want this we want affordable housing and look at it for the future of your neighborhood and urge you to consider honor san francisco and honor what is there already. and don't do something new because it's new so, please understand the importance of this discretionary review and we strongly yours you to remove the

penthouse >> thank you. >> thank you. i'm jim 449 duncan street i'm reading a letter from a resident ordinance the street since i didn't write this. i'm john jordan my wife and i have lived there 20 years. this being my grand parent home ami api i'll been here and my mom was born and raised here human resources the neighborhood has changed do we want to, involved with what happens with those projects or let the speculators and developers development to the extreme people have a right to build but should consider the

neighborhoods. two years ago, i walked around the corner and west met with the project sponsors i thought those plans don't add up all the neighbors agreed the size and scale focusing often the roof-deck was out of the context for the street it was in the respected with the stop sign the project size will disaster the neighboring structures this will not we would not be here if the project sponsor removed the penthouse i understand they want to get the most out of their project so when we saw they were expanding we want this looked at. i was present at our previous meeting taking the day off work

only to be resulted in the project sponsor employers failed to post the notice are there any any ramification for the disregard of procedures this is has giv has given my wife and i more time to get to know our neighborhood thank you for your consideration >> thank you. >> jean harding 449 duncan street the day's the preapplication meeting the neighborhood immediately voiced multiple observations to the 34037 project you got it right in having the removal of the fourth floor but it took a site

invest and many many calls before the pack of the project that the project was modified one notable foot went beyond what the code was. the rdt was not aware yet initially without being aware of the grade the team directed the removal of the floor the department never asked for an explanation but i found that was strange north yet now their claiming the project meets the residential guidelines even considering the plan of the block, however, in a dense he urban environment that regard the commission needs to consider

how the project impacts not only the street phase but the properties on 28 street. because of the acoustics particular to the area conversations on the roof-deck are loud. the planning department has not properly addressed our concerns regarding property noise they don't acknowledge they have baked and any activity including conversations will be clearly heard by a portion of the neighborhood since the technical are entertainment centers there's a family room and bonus room their removal would not effect the liveability of the home they'll widen the other

neighborhood as a whole needs to be given with weight the neighborhood has to live with the results after everyone everything is done thank you very much >> next speaker. i'll call more names (calling names). >> hi i wanted to point out that affidavit he called earlier was here he have to leave to go to his job and also two weeks ago i'm elizabeth i have lived on duncan street 25 years and

strongly object the project is in no way comparable that the existing sfamz on the block nor the exist listens regardless of set back it is shocking to me that such a big building would be allowed as stewards of the city i hope you'll protect the city and hope that's what we'll do today and i'm concerned with the penthouse noise we're a unique geography spot and on a huge steep hill so any noise you heard before it amplified. in order to fit the four stories they have to dig do you think

there's an underground stream that runs through duncan they're to have to dig down that is of concern. this project is from a dispensary that will be getting out of the project as soon as possible it's a dispensary locking to maximize his profit i hope you'll remove the penthouse and deck >> commissioners i don't think i've tried or introduced myself i'll not be addressing at this point thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. hi, i'm meredith thank you for taking the time i live on duncan street directly across marcus book store folks have been reiterating our concerns i want

to life with one thought we're a community we care about what happens to our environment. part of that has to do with the beautiful victorians and the development of the new properties coming in and making sure that they do come into alignment this is not something we want in our community pause it's a community. i love my neighbors but not looking into my windows and backyard and don't want to hear their cell phone conversations. i'm unique i'm probably the only one here that lives on the bottom floor i want to express my opposition this to this construction we live there and our new neighborhoods will be part of our community don't you want them to start open a good

foot please, please consider our dr and remove that top deck and penthouse >> thank you. >> hi, i'm cynthia i live on duncan across the street from the development. i moved there in the 84 i was a c w a union member and could afford to buy a home in san francisco it's a great cul-de-sack and i want to say i've never bonding been to a planning commission meeting it's been a real education it was fascinating to hear how people have solicited input and quite surprising of the experience working with those people. again my feeling is that what we're opening our door is to a

motor vehicle mcmanntion its way too big to open the door to one after another it sets a precedent for all neighborhoods >> thank you. >> good evening, members of the commission i'm is there any public comment? i little on duncan i want to say i oppose the proposed plan it's a shocking mismatch the existing scale and stepping of the homes and the aggressive scale of the structure i want to say there's no 3 existing offer garage structures. for those reasons i plead that

the planning commission will have the top structure of the building removed >> thank you. next speake >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening. i'm christopher baker. i live at 356, 28 street i've been in real estate development for 25 years but very if i experience in front of of the planning commission. in reading did project analysis i was struck that it is compatible with the health and

depth of the buildings in the surrounding area how could that be when any finance background forced me into a walk around the neighborhood where i looked at 35 single-family homes and said how many of those stories are they over garage how many square root it the lot for public record how many secret is the building for public record i came up with comparing 35 homes the proposed project is 2 1/2 size larger than the average home on the street the proposed project as 1.7 average levels it is twice as many levels as the

average single-family home the living space is 4 times the average as is the square footage of the building this analysis didn't include the homes on the street that render those numbers relative to what exists. commissioners, i don't oppose the building of a new home but the 39 hundred square feet home one that is clearly not comparable with the surrounding neighborhood. thank you for your time >> thank you is there any further public comment in support of the dr. >> hi, i'm georgia i'm here about the may or may not dr i'm concerned about the demolition it is primarily about the demolition section in all the

things that triggers i'm concerned about a project a building that is now countered affordable being replied by a building that's not favorable despite what is said in documents and papers i think when i laid out projector in my 6 page document it kind of says it all you need to please use your discretion to deal with the tripod of relative affordability with this project it's kind of like a fact we know what is affordable but we know what is out there it relative affordability this project is huge the guest bedroom and the bonus room and the enormous size

i've heard you say a 3 bedroom house will make a good family housing as chris laid out those numbers it's very true so when you use this you have to think what have we dialed down to make it more relatively affordable like a diagramer on a volume control i think because it's a demolition i hope you'll consider it and have a conversation what means relatively affordable is all that stuff in the 317 i've cited in my paper i think that is really critical to this project and i'm very concerned particularly with the immediate neighbors not enough attendance has been paid ideally in you

look at the relative affordability shrink the project in matching the prevailing pattern. of duncan street that's exceptionally extraordinary 1 or 2 stories over a garage thank you. is there any further public comment >> my name is cecil i wasn't prepared to speckle but my sister went home with a tooth arc. my parent bought the home next door to the proposed area 60 years ago. we've all been raised in that house and grandchildren and

great grandchildren we've been used to air and light what they are proposing to do will cut off my mothers window my mother is 85 years old that there cut off the dining room and the bedroom and the living room. we don't know what they're comingful in with we've seen different plans we saw little bathroom windows and now their huge. and in this case, the top area, yes it's a big concern we would like to see it begun but also for us there's a existing problem with those over shadowing my mom's house with a one story over the garage will sandwich it that's it for now i

wanted to address the issue from our point of view that have lived there for 60 years >> thank you. is there any additional public comment seeping project sponsor your team has 5 minutes. >> sir do i want to speak as part - >> sorry i missed that one. >> i think he was with us (laughter) i guess it's evening now good evening dan with ruben and rose i'm here for a local builder that lives from the site on jersey street this the second

project he'll build on his own although he's done other projects before launching into the details i apologize for the invention that the commission and community was caused by itself mishap of the notice it was ina.d. tenant we're looking forward at that time, merit to replace a small delipidated shack with a new 4 bedroom residence. more often than not there's a question about the adequacy of outreach was there enough and did the developer engage with the real spirit of compromise i think the answer is unkwvnl yes. there's been a series of meetings with the community at

large. those have not been meeting for their own sake by meeting where we've heard feedback and made changes to the project some of those are reflected in the plans you've received in your package on the tenth and the rendering which you've received those reflect our intent to change the plans going forward, of course, with our approval in the end none of the changes are satisfactory to others in the community who insist on the removal of top floor and it's entirety i understand the loss of view for the dr requester, however, i think we need to begin with the presumption that people will point their homes to a good use

this is not the animal how did this is a good space for a home offenders office with a nice outdoor space. i think this is a textbook case that they follow the residential guidelines the guidelines don't say that buildings have to be the same size but the scale should be compatible with the street and specific instructs set back the top floor we've done that and reduce the par fit we've done that. using transparent deck railings we've done that, too. and here i see in the rendering how the building has changed over time we've done everything

the guidelines have asked and set back and the health reduced it's 36 in total to the top of the penthouse that's well under the 40 foot health limit the rendering show the top is invisible when our close to the building and resides into the background and that's what the design guidelines are intended to accomplish. lastly like to talk about what the building looks like from the rear this is the adjacent building to the north there or excuse me. to the uphill there's a 5 foot health difference not a major health difference didn't dwarf the next

building inspection there has been effort to talk about talk to the speaker before us those conversations ended awe brussel i'm going to change gears and talk about our design team i'm sure you're aware of there's a couple of architects to date an architect of record and in the interest of the consistency the sponsor will with work greg square foot and the other architecture both of them professors at cca and the architect going forward greg is here to answer questions thank you very much >> thank you now taking public comment on