let me point out should find confusion the developers and my confusion and some of the developers implication misrepresentation in the passage page one 12 hundred square feet the records say 8 hundred and 37 are the numbers quadrupling page 2 the person we've been dealing with in planning notes there's 8 letters 0 no mention of the correspondents the professional 86 and 91 and 93 their deceptive page 77 complains there would be an extremely modest impact an charles and barbaras how is it seems not likely it blocks the

sun the front and the back page 76 offices a hearsay statement from an attorney they were stone walls by neighborhood quote who could be only satisfied in the home stays as is there is nothing further from the truth i suggest you scrutinize their letters one is from church street and one from a neighbor he's moving and smolg someone that claims to be a neighbor lives one mile away and no verifyable addresses those are oriental letters i'm not the penthouse is appropriate but when we discussed it the woman said it was north of the project that has absolutely no effective

in our conversation she said she have biased towards the work saying she have confidence in highs designing design he don't say a lot of work in the city. >> thank you, ma'am our time is up. >> is there any additional public comment. >> good afternoon. i'm diane i'm here to speak on behalf of the discretionary review. >> i'm sorry ma'am speak or speak into the microphone and i'm here to speak on behalf of the discretionary review i live on the same block and on the same side the street i live 3 doors away i have a letter from another neighbor jennifer and frankfort, kentucky could to be

submitted into the record i live near the project not peppering effected by the project i'm here with no dog ♪ fight i'm here just to speak because i'm concerned about preserving neighborhood character i've live on this block for thirty years and i'm interested in preserving our close commit neighborhood and pooefr preserving the character to the important we preserve the light and air for everyone not just the people next door but this will effect everyone in the neighborhood and people who commute through the neighborhood so i'm in support of set backs for this project both if the front and in the rear i think it's important to set the

project back some from the street so we don't have a massive block overlooking the sidewalk sea should be set back in the rear so that there's light and air for the neighbors who are effected so i'm here to obtain object to the penthouse as well it will be larger than anything on the block i hope you'll support of discretionary review for live and quality of life for everyone we welcome neighboring neighbors would be wish to join our neighborhood not those who wish so maximum middle profit by building the biggest building they can

>> thank you. is there any additional public comment. >> good afternoon. i'm paul and my family and i have been in the neighborhood i'm here to speak on behavior of charley and barbie appreciate the stair penthouse and hope they'll do something more than american people ordinarily house i live across the street but i really want to say i feel the impact on the back of charley and barbara's quavered is going to be significant the sun is a limited i know if they consider the 5 foot set back and develop a balcony a large opening doors they'll find that much more fundamental i've lived in the

neighbor for thirty years and never seen neighbors on the decks i hope the developers will looked at this opposing to a roof deck and reduce the impacts on the backyard and neighbors basically that's what i wanted to say. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment. >> okay. seeing none project sponsor you have 10 minutes. >> good afternoon commissioner president wu and commissioners i'm david silverman working with the sponsors justin and julie onion they're proposed renovation they need more space for their family this is an

owner occupied dwelling despite the allocations made by the speakers this is a modest edition 10 feet below the 40 feet or thirty foot building consisting consistent with the neighborhood the rear extension it less than 2 feet from the existing upper story it has a side set back in the rear it's noticed it t in the dr report it has not met anything extraordinary we ask you not take dr and accept the project as proposed i'd like to introduce you to the project sponsor julie kim. >> good afternoon. i'm julie kim and justin is one of the owners i know it's a long day

and thank the planning department marseille who's been a patient person i'm here to ask you follow the elements by the planning department and not take discretionary review and our main objective to create a home for a growing family the plan the minimum footprint for a bedroom to be loejtd on the 6 floos under oath we have a 6 month-old baby i know having to reach our kids' bedroom is not ideal as david mentioned we'll be a fuel 10 feet under the maximum limit and our architect

christian will talk about that and each of the neighbors live in a higher building and those are over 3 thousand square feet and mr. hart one of the dr requesters is an additional in an we believe that you deny the request for discretionary review and allow us to build a home it's family friendly thank you. >> it will come up when you start speaking. >> good morning. i'm christian justin and julie's architect thank you for the opportunity to speak in evening our approach as with our work to the sensitive and meet our clients needed our

proposal is well within the san francisco planning code and it adheres to the residential good morning, supervisors to the rear yard and front set back and the magic height and footprint in the rear yard the proposed editions the proposed edition awe lines with the set back limit the result of if 2 foot 4 inches beyond the house the and were neighbor stent beyond our edition we're not asking to take advantage or proposing rear yard deluck's deduction that allows us more edition into the rear yard if the front yard the edition come employees with the set back in terms of height we're a full story 10 feet below

the maximum and if i can get the overhead but that height limit not fitting on the screen is represented by the red doted line we're proposing changes but acknowledging in our application is extraordinary or sets the boundary on the contrary we really have tried to and made great fofrpt effort to be restrained in the quality and contestant of the building code i hope you'll agree to move forward and allow this. >> is there any members of the public that want to speak in support of project sponsor. >> i'm amy a san francisco

resident i'm reading two letters today written by resident from the neighborhood that are unable to attend this meeting the first letter is by gina dear commissioners i've it does it be read for the discretionary review so i can voice now so for the for the project my family and i reside on church street around the corner from the rear of my enemy i have a clear view of the back of justin and julie's house he am generally in favor of the housing they improve the block and neighborhood i'm in favor of consider edition that achieve the facade and general appearances of the air the plans for justin and julie's plan is

well the architect has done lots of work in the neighborhood i know this is important when deciding who to work with thankful created a plan with an architecture interest in the neighborhood and respectful to the neighborhoods julie and justin have's met with us and understand the growing families it i think it is important to allow families to stay in san francisco i appreciate the opportunity to address the commission and hope that i made it clear it not in san francisco is opted to growing the second letter by best testimony benson on church street dear complaining commissioners outreaching i've asked this be read i beverly wanted to voice

my support sponsor the project my house is not in direct view i ask they improve the block and whole there recent many challenges for 0 families with small children and smaller homes to be provided room for children in san francisco in addition there are several homes on the street it is not the first to be remodeled the current real estate market is by reduced inventory if this family can't make improvements there are be developers that will cease the opportunity to make an department i appreciate this opportunity and release that are

neighbors. >> thank you, ma'am your time is up. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment. >> hello, i'm dale aim a long time resident of san francisco i lived in upper noah valley it is essentially the first block of glel park and i want to say that first off the existing structure has no earth sithsd i know the property plan is you got user upgrade the neighborhood i feel that some of the proponents have tried to portray the sponsors as

being disingenuous to the developers we've heard that such a sighted could sustain a much larger house and i think it is truly disingenuous opposing a 45 hundred square feet home erie think there is several hopes that have sold over the last year between 35 and 6 thousand square feet so this house is modest within the scope compared to many of the projects that have happened i don't think it's precedent setting those project sponsors have asking for a reasonable amount of space and not industry try to present or negotiate that as a way of ended up with something that is just a

farce of a negotiation the proponent that will across the street will ludicrous view the street at 31 feet is skrukd in such a way that randell street a down sloped those houses that are south of that are two and three stories below garage those houses are imposeings it's house downhill as additional set back so i ask you to support this project that's a reasonable project for a family in the neighborhood.

>> thank you. is there any additional public comment okay dr requesters you have a 2 minute rebuttal. >> first, i'd like to noted that nobody in my of our comments said anything about the intentions of the owners as far as where thaip they'll live there or not that was mentioned is twice in the presentation i wanted to show first of all we didn't say the house should remain the same we mentioned that certainly i mention this is within the code i understand that and people can say it's within the code i get it our house is shorter and one the reasons for the set back to average some of the rear facing things at least on the third floor as you can see on the

eastern side to our side that's what the set back dozen as well paul was saying a balcony with a thank you pens view we're also not begrudging the wish to be on the same floor as the of the rest of us have floor plans that allows us to do that the upper floor can be articulated more so the impact on our light and air coming into my upper floor will be certainly be affected by the height and location of the stairwell and the backyard will be really affected this house bludgeons forward and back it's within the guidelines but could be improved.

>> thank you. next speaker. >> hi i suppose at the time good to lead who's being disingenuous we're neighborhood i don't look at against development that's not come up i've never asked for the dr or the neighbors my issue is my view but we have a 3 level home across the street i didn't build someone else did those are not factors to me, you look at the project maybe it's under 40 feet but the neighborhood skylight and the nice victorians and through a monolithic power point on top of that is unreasonable of under the 40 feats imperfect

suitable level that comes up to the roof or use a hatch it is used in the neighborhood successfully i got back to the owners and say we can shave a inch off the power point that's my rebuttal i think i've asked for the dr. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hi thank you, again i wanted to reiterate that my original dr that you probably got last week or too weeks ago i asked for i really wanted to come down but my citizens came to me people live in the city and want bigger homes i know they can go up higher i'm asking so we as

pedestrians and the drivers going down the street can driving drive along and have a set back so in my packet i encourage you to look at the 13 examples and almost every house in noah valley that's as an edition has 8 to 15 feet please los angeles county the packet the person gina is not a neighbor and may have 2k3w5r7bd support because she has a proposal for a 3 story rear edition that maybe why they're supporting each other thank you so much for your time and hearing the projects it seems like small bones he appreciate our effort this is our home. >> project sponsor up to 6

minutes. >> thank you, commissioners briefly only one of the dr requesters here today lives adjacent to the proposal remaining two dr requests live across the street and if you look at the houses or in the block and the slope of the randell street one of the speakers mentions it's pretty clear they like to preserve their views otherwise the project is not impacting them in any way as far as the set back it would not be in context with the neighborhood i'd like to note that the dr

requesters acknowledge that they will at 3 story houses but they don't want the project sponsor to have a 3 story how is it doesn't seem fair one item that was focused on by mr. park the stair penthouse now it is not been acknowledged by any of the speakers that the stair penthouse is within the space of otherwise that is occupied by a 4 story the stair penthouse is modest in size i believe has been reduced as much as it can be and sloped so it's not that boxy structure that appeared in one of the dr requesters drawings the stairwell penthouse is not extraordinary it is a common place structure throughout the

city and you know there are people that dislike them but you know a deck in san francisco is considered common place and in fact can be a permit can be obtained over the counter you have to have a stairway to reach the deck so christian can explain but you know if we're going to have decks we need a way to reach the deck as for the final speaker there was one at 140 randell mentions there are impacts to the vegetable garner but the speaker lives 3 doors away no impacts to

her house i'm not sure those two are consistent in my evident i didn't hear if the dr requesters or speakers in their support that mentioned extraordinary impacts that's what we are here to discuss, of course, some reductions of light to the adjacent structure that's what happened when you build, however the impacts would have been much reinforce if the building was well to the buildable envelope the sponsors have done quite a bit to keep their proposal modest but again, i'd like to under the

influence the horizon is set back and we've spoken about that thank you very much for your time. >> thank you with that the public hearing portion is closed. >> commissioner richards i think this is a great project pinch me i actually saw in the real estate section the house is 152 randell is almost 4 thousand square feet four and a half million dollars i have two thoughts how to make this a better project taken this and asked myself going through any grandmothers basement and wondering how this will work one thing i'll come back a modest set back a 5 or 8 feet is one

hundred square feet or i really think the pedestrian streetscape will look better than this is a modest how did this is the only thing i'll support in the dr situation here. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i agree i happy to be going that way coming from the shell station and crossing mission and is an josie noticed the change in slaeths what quite a bit hire than the places on the north side of randell i don't see the impacts to the neighborhood on the south however i do acknowledge there are some impacts on the property and 136 randell, however, their

plans as they stand right now are 4 feet 5 inches lower than the proposed estimate the paeblgd house on 136, 10 feet below the zoning site and as far as the rear edition still i don't really staff may be able to help me one of the two compromise with the new plan 3.76 set back on randell is; is that correct. >> that's correct. >> they changed the top 69 penthouse. >> they designed it to angle as a stairwell. >> i'm fine i'm listening to what has been present as a

possible set back for the front i don't see where it needs happen 136 does not have set back oh, they have set back. >> i'm not certain i'll have to pull it up. >> i don't know. i certainly will entertain that although i've looked at the planned where the bedrooms are and 94 none of the bedrooms are huge the two on the front is fairly small i can range a 10 by 12 and 11 thank you 13 not big bedrooms and couple of bathrooms you have to look at the space because something will have to be cut to some degree that's my only problem. >> commissioner hillis. >> can i