>> so inspector duffy has indicated he has nothing to add, and we have public comment. how many people plan to speak on public comment? >> rebuttal is after public comment. all right, if you would, if you are able to line up on the far side of the room i know it's late and everyone maybe tired. and the first person can come up to the podium to speak. >> i will allow three minutes so you would not have been prejudiced by the hour. but i encourage you not to necessarily use your full-time. >> if you haven't already, if you can fill out a speaker card that would be helpful. >> i hope you bear with me i am 88 years old and unaccustomed to speaking in public. >> that fine but we need you to use the microphone.

>> i am sorry. it's a little late for me i should be in bed. >> for all of us. >> it's important that i be here. >> my name is nancy peggan, i own the apartment building at 934 carolina street to the south of the proposed building. my family came from russia in the early 19-- sorry i have to put my glasses on. in the early 1900's and settled on potrero hill i have lived on or owned property on this block of carolina street since 1929. many of my family members lived and worked on potrero hill and i married and raised my young children on carolina street. my husband and i purchased the lot from 934 caroline from my parents in the 1950s. he drew up the designs of the apartment building and we built

it in 1958. literally working alongside our contractor. our children picked up nails and swept floors and worked along with them. my husband passed away last year but with my daughter's help we continue to maintain and improve the apartment building we have provided affordable housing since 1958 and under rent control since the 80s. after working with our neighbors after possible impact to the neighborhood we decided to only build stories in order to keep the height of our building in line with the surrounding homes and the neighborhood in general. we worked with our neighbors, listened to their concerns and we ultimately decided on two stories. even though three stories would have obviously brought us greater income to us over the

years. i am deeply concerned about the look and the feel of our neighborhood changing so much. rather than the charming smaller sized buildings that i grew up with we are seeing a trend to massive sterile homes. rather than a neighborhood of a working class people that form a tight community. we are seeing developer come in to build homes strictly for profit. the builders are not interested in our neighborhood. we share a history with our neighbors on carolina street and with the case of mrs. larson and mrs. snider we intend to keep

our efforts on carolina street. i ask that the board present with mrs. larson and snider and as my other neighbors. i concern with their appeal, please respect and consider what your long-term citizens have to say, we have put our hearts and souls into this neighborhood, thank you for your consideration. >> i have a question. have you had any contact -- sorry, i have a question. have you had any contact with the project sponsors? >> no. >>-okay, thank you. >> next speaker please. >> hi i am cathy quadros, that was my mother she owns the apartment at 934 carolina street.

i lived on this block on carolina in my childhood and as an adult. as with my parent's tradition, i am now the hands on manager of their apartment building and come up to potrero hill on a weekly basis. i am deeply concerned about the trend of monster homes. i continue to see small charming homes replaced with massive homes. please note that three of the neighboring buildings, my mothers and mrs. sniders and mrs. larsons have a multi-generational history. these families for generations have lived on carolina and raised their families here and want to keep that tradition alive. mrs. larson and my mother have had affordable housing for families over the years. they have stringent processes

under rent control. they can't easily tear down their buildings and replace with a massive building and not that that is their intention. and to make a reasonable return on their investment. in reality the playing field in san francisco real estate is not level. and these apartments are under threat to be overwhelmed. we are not opposed to 910 carolina but ask that it fit with the style and topography of the neighborhood. the proposed home is replacing according to the assessor's office 400 square foot of living space older home. with one based on the newer values is nine times larger and up to three stories taller. it's square footage is greater

than mrs. larson's and my mother's rent control homes putting together. in contrast both apartment buildings have three one-bedroom units that provide affordable housing for six to 12 people. and surely this single family home should be reduced, the two apartments together offer six off street spaces. thank you for the opportunity to air our concerns and ask that you help us to come to a more fair and equitable solution, and our voices were not heard at the planning commission. we hope to retain a sense of continuity on carolina street. we understand that things change but ask that you proceed in a

thoughtful and fair manner. >> question did you get the 311 notification for the project? >> i assume that my parents did, i tell you that my father died last year. and during he was sick for four years and in hospice for two years at home. >> explain no more the question withdrawn. >> yeah, it was not in our forefront when he passed away. we got involved in this. >> next speaker please. >> make sure i am really talking into the mic. as a neighbor of close proximity of the building i am catherine bloom, i have lived in the street for 20 years and concerned about the loss of the unique fabric of the neighborhood as these mansions are replacing the older

buildings. though i not opposed to change this is a large box with little or no adherence to set-backs alongside of the existing structures. and it will entirely overwhelm the adjacent properties. if the planning department allowing it as to be built, it will destroy the existing quality of life. to quote from the san francisco design guidelines quote it's important that the design of new buildings is compatible with nearby buildings. a single building out of contact to its surrenderings of the character of the neighborhood, and if repeated often enough to the city as a whole.

buildings may be out of character if deep and tall. and could make residents feel boxed in and cut off from open space, end quote. for better adherence to the planning code we strongly recommend that the build include set-backs and height down to the adjacent one and two story buildings. 2, the building should setback on the site to not prevent light and air. and eliminate the roof deck there is an out door space that should require for the single family residents, and in the code it says that new buildings

must comply with the following principles am ensure that the building square is providing adequate set-backs. this is a single family with square footage for more than two housing, and it seems amle for scaling down the size of the building to allow for the set-backs and a setback on the rear story and still have a right to a decent-sized home. i don't object to a person to make a living but to the neighbor as quality of life is troubling. we are hopeful that our valid concerns will be addressed during this process, thank you very much. >> same question are you within the notification? >> yes i am. >> are you aware that of the discretionary review process. >> i was out of town at the time

of the discretionary review process, and i did my best to submit a letter but i myself was unable to attend. >> thank you. >> yep. >> next speaker, please. >> good evening, i am dan chan, and i reside at 926 carolina street two doors down from the propose the building. i have lived in the neighborhood for 19 years and concerned about the scale and size of the proposed structure. it's so out of proportion and not compatible with the size and scale of the neighborhood. to put in perspective, this is 910, yes, it's tall. but look at how the set-back is. okay. if you look at this next structure, this is how the new building will look on the site

of the building, how out of step and out of scale it is with the neighborhood. i am sorry that is not compatible with the neighborhood. this is the side wall from peggy's yard that i will look at from my two seven-foot window in the kitchen space is four feet. and that's what i look at. and my concern because i have two seven-foot windows, and anyone on the deck can peer right into my living space and kitchen. and this roof deck access which they conveniently left out on a lot of drawings, will make the building taller than the 900 carolina building. okay. and for the record i did not have a one-on-one with the owner or the builder.

okay so that said the front to the back depth of the top floor as i indicated earlier, far exceeds the depth of the corner building. way out of scale. i am not opposed to them building i am asking them to scale it back like these buildings here so it's not overwhelming. this is the box we are talking about here come on seriously. okay. so just because the scale and size is within the allowable codes does not make it right. i mean it's just absurd. right. and accept for the initial face-to-face meeting back in 200013 and an e-mail from the architect in 2013 the builder has never reached out to work with us. that's it. and shortly after the revised plan, we were told it was filed and the way that you deal with

it, you work through the planning department. that's it, that was the only contact that we had with the builder. and for her to say we had one-on-ones, that's a lie i am sorry, that's a lie. okay. so i would like them to substantiate that and show records of who they speak to not me or my neighbors, period. so i would like you to reconsider their permit and have them scale it back like mrs. larson proposed i am fine with it. >> your time is up. >> did you attend the discretionary hearing. >> no, i was out of town i work in santa clara. >> okay. >> and by the way it was scheduled after 7 o'clock. >> thank you, next speaker please.

>> hi it's late i will be brief. i am the tenant that lives at 922 carolina. i am here to express my support. i have lived there for five years, and work for a nonprofit and i could not live in san francisco if this neighborhood did not exist. and i am the one that does most of the gardening and to live next to that monlivic wall is scary for me. >> you want to state your name for the record. >> elizabeth broedershan. >> hi, i am keira curtis i am gardener that work on the other side and i moved from alaska

where it's dark and cloudy. i have lived there for five years, and are my main view is southwardly facing windows. we have addressed the views and the sunlight that hits peggy's place. but my windows will be blocked, and i have a view of the burno heights, and that will affect me. i am not sure that you got my e-mail, i wrote one of them. so thank you. >> thank you. >> any other public comment? seeing none, we will have rebuttal and start with mrs. larson.

>> there was some concern about the size of the corner house at 900 carolina street. this is a condominium, it has 1,975 square feet. so you see the front it looks large. but again the top floor is only one room. and it's only one part it's a condo. so it's not this one solid building, it's only a condo. this section here is the condo. down here is another part of another condo, on 22nd street. the building, it looks fairly large but it isn't, only 1920 square feet. when the attorney was showing plans of the project. i kept looking at her plans and

thinking they are still different from the plans we were receiving. my property ends here and the new plan ends here and there pop-out there. and i know some discussion about reducing it but still goes beyond my property and the pop-up makes it more so. when you -- this is what the back of the property looks like. it's four stories. again there is no other house on carolina street that has four stories in the back. some have three, with a balcony but none have four it goes straight out and no light for the tenants. we have gardens up and down the area. we won't have light there, this building is way too tall. at three stories it's maximum.

that would be better, i would like to see something reduced in this size. the plans that we were receiving were showing that the house was 4,658 square feet. so even if they do a reduction, it's a large house. so when i mentioned earlier about plans what it looks like and what it could be. they can still have a very large house with a reduction, probably about 800 feet to 1,000 feet. going from something like this, where you have the pop-out in the back and straight up it's a massive box. make the reduction. bring it back in get rid of the pop-out. and have a balcony on the third floor, this is still the fourth floor, no other buildings have a fourth floor. i have a balcony in the front and back and that reduces the

image and less of impact to the neighborhood. i would like you guys to really think about what we have here and the drawings we have and the plans that show -- this is a huge house. no thought to the neighbors. >> a point of clarification, the last section that you showed is what you would like to see. you eliminate the entire pop out? >> yes, because it goes beyond all the other houses back there. thank you. >> thank you. mrs. snider. >> i don't understand how this is thought of as three stories. you see the bottom floor is above grade there. we had a first meeting, it was very contentious, but part of

what happened was -- sorry but part of what happened was that maybe the 17 neighbors when they stopped yelling at the architect and the owner. were asked to give their contact information. at which we did. i have never had a conversation with the builder, the architect, anybody. i am right next door. i made many phone calls to see how i can send my brief and finally got through. but prior to that there was the meeting on 3-11-13 i think, and then i got one e-mail from someone and i had no idea who it was. and amere fifi he's the architect, i thought it was somebody else. rizza.

anyway. all right, this is a picture of nine of the 10 houses going down the hill. from my house. the only missing structure is nancy's three units small apartment building. the lawyer for the sponsor said about the deck. that it was setback five feet. i did the calculations on it. my height setback five feet i would still see 36 feet of my yard from the roof. and that roof access which is left off of every drawing, you know what can i say, it's butt

ugly. what else we never asked for it to be two units. i never asked for it to be two units or that dorothy did either. that is something that they thought would be something we want, i don't know. [bell] i don't know what to say here. i mean -- you want to ask me questions. i mean -- i concur with dorothy that if the building could step down if it was setback in the front. if the pop-out were eliminated. and honestly if it was a two-car garage. did i say the roof deck gone. questions?

>> no questions it looks like thank you. we can hear from the permit holder. >> really quick, know it's late. i want to start by saying this and i know that i said it before, but worth reiterating. since we first presented the project and made changes to the project. there was pretty much silence from the neighbors like meetings on landscaping and things until this process. that's a pretty long delay in terms of they saying we didn't work with them. no one was asking and did the meeting and working with people individually -- that's the last we heard on that. i want to reiterate that.

and there were renderings that were shown that didn't accurate accurately represent the conditions. and it's helpful to see the back of the building. we talked about how many stories it is. that's the basement window and that's helpful to show the condition of the back of the property. and other than that i will take any questions. >> is the permit holder the person who is going to live there? >> no. >> how many bedrooms is proposed to be? >> it is -- four bedrooms. >> okay. >> and is the roof a deck?

>> the roof is a deck. >> so that's the fifth story. because there is the pop-up on the roof that no one bothered to note that's a fifth story, and that will be used fully. if you have a deck you will have to have a wall around that deck so people don't fall down and kill themselves. so in fact there is a fifth story. to me. i saw a lot pop-up thing and though there is not anything there, you have to some sort of fence. so it will get larger in the scheme of things. >> well, the building is three stories, it's not four. >> i counted four but i am not a mathematician. you are smarter than i am but i counted four humor me. can you put up your pretty drawing, again. >> sure.

did you want to see the front or back? >> the one that you showed previously you wanted make your point that it's a good-looking building. three or four stories, i see a top story there looks to be something that exist -- exits on a deck and though there is nothing around a deck, i doubt that mr. sanchez would allow a deck for full use than a roof without some protective wall of several feet. that is a fifth story or fourth i don't care it's another story and goes higher. >> there will be a railing

around the roof deck. >> okay. >> thank you, mrs. knight. mr. sanchez, you have something further? >> i can -- i can. >> i was going to have someone from the residential design team present tonight but i decided to take it down. go back to the property at 900 there was building applications in early 2000. and a discretionary hearing in 2005. some dr taken and changes from the record that i can access now and unclear what was made. and on the overhead -- sorry, so it was approved in 2005 and subsequently constructed. and if you want to see what

there before. and this is what was there before, a single family home at the rear, and garage was demolished and the permit was to extend this home and extended further on the lot and vertically as well. and that was of the project that was approved it wasn't appealed at the board of appeals and a discretionary review and maybe some compromise reached and it's encrist encrypted in minutes. and back to this project we probably count three stories but four levels. because the lowest level is a basement and not classify as a story. so it's a four-level building. the roof deck would be allowed