written objection 0 respectfully ask you to deny this conditional use as a planning resolution created delores between 1980 describing our neighborhood as quote an outstanding and unique area that contribute to san francisco visual form and character you see this conforms daily by popper it of the delores and the stairs the neighborhood over 8 thousand square feet this will be an out of scale in the special use district the context 9 average single-family residences is one thousand plus square feet the largest out liar single-family residences is 4 thousand plus that was built in 19 hundred as those include the buildings on double lots the delores heats residential design

guidelines recommended them 38 hundred square feet over 8 hundred square feet that is twice the size of many buildings on the block as a volunteer organization we work with all of the various proposed projects in the disclosing height and can resolve any problems and try to work out we try hard to avoid meetings like this for the record we've been dealing with this since 2014 despite complaint of scale or ignored and even worse people are shown one thing and something else is done this is massive over 8 thousand square feet i note for the record the plans filed two weeks ago added a 26

hundred square feet underground has not independent housing stock for a single-family this raises lot mergers as a way to reduce scarce housing the city in other words, to build a massive family home given all that we feel this project is not necessary and desirable and certainly not comparable with this neighborhood therefore we request you deny it thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners my name is greg robert sfgovtv i current reside at cumberland directly across the street

the schuf summer related states i quote the rooftop as 40 feeding feet wide is comparable with other longer rooflines in the immediate facility up to 50 feet ends quote the residential design guidelines stress the importance of the immediate context that is a narrow rooftop this project reads not like an appropriate home none of the roofs range up to one and 50 feet which roofs the planner indicated to psychologies on cumber land that is the home he live in one of those has a pitched roof and won so you weren't by mature tries making the rooftop not very visual and on other lot at the western end of the lot not visible where 323

is located and last they indicated 325 to 329335 didn't exist and 336 is a pitched roof and 339 has a 25 footed rooftop please deny it rooftop is not not necessary and desirable and incomparable with the scale of the neighborhood thank you for your time and consideration. >> thank you. next speaker. good afternoon, commissioners - overhead got it thank you. >> i'm our hours abuts the southeast corner of the proposed project we've lived in the

neighborhoods for 90 years i'd like to talk about the post second unit this project start as a single-family built across two lots the planning department had no problem it took our filing of a dr so show that is contrary to the city's plan something it wrong in the department your grateful that caused the staff to direct a second unit here's a graphic of the property second unit the first and second proposal the second one is larger it is unableable while it was storage it is now two rooms but those are subterranean rooms with no windows getting literally only from adjacent holes the ground hardly rooms for raising

children the front bedroom abuts the walkway it will have zero privacy and on this a thin wall separates it from the gorgeous and garage door the occupants will be awe weakened when the heroism drives in and out of the gorgeous garage it is hinged it appears to be a single-family if you follow the real estate sales the basement units are not made into condos sold separately not by separate families they're sold and a single-family homes with the insurance to the buyer the unit never has to be rented out used by guests or offered under airbnb interesting on the second graphic the original design for the single unit has the same space the basement only

not as closed to the garage and called bedrooms one and two they were removed to decrease the square footage of the house now they're a back and called the second unite this is the sham of the project by allowing the dpoofgs a that would be helpful sound moderating sized house with two standard-sized lots that can support a single-family you're eliminating two family-sized units if you, you want to create more go to the conditional use thank you. >> >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening commissioner i'm bruce i live on 20 street we share the corners with cumberland there's no public interest in allowing lost mergers or approving the case

the lots should be separate and support two sfarmz with the delores it violates public policy and planning practices in san francisco sfgovtv please is it possible to focus this this is a page from the affordable housing bonus plan from january '48 staff explains 27 lot messenger in 2008, we looked at those 37 mergers and learned they include all lot line adjustments we found only 17 of the 37 were involved rh zoning district and none zero were interior lot be messengerers for the combined lot most of 17 requester corner or non-standard lots that use the lot adjustment so there were

no lots merged the entire city comparable and provide precedence for this merger let's focus on cumber land this is a map of the subject lot and adjacent lot there recent subject lot there are 5 double interior lots just is a go double lots on cumberland an immediate fat with two lots unquote back to 1945 e 35 before the first building ordinance now 8 and today 5 and this is for 1965 two double instead of the 5 the only change since 65 it was merged with no associated construction not a single lot in the last half century they've

been unchanged if there is any historical change split the lots when double lots were split that strengthens what the developer says is a lot pattern with no mergers the last 80 years no precedent and no way a merge will not be considered a precedence it is necessary and desirable and not necessary and consistent with the current practice and not with the pattern of any neighborhood that's why i and 4 on the neighborhood associations are opposed to this 0 project we shouldn't allow anything like this the city since 2008 and probably longer and not on that lot for 80 years thank you.

>> next speaker, please. >> good evening i live on 21st street my partner dan and i have lived in our homes for 2 two years overhead please. thank you. >> new housing is more expensive than existing housing every time we say a city allow the demolition we are decreasing the affordability of housing in san francisco between 2012 and 2014 nationally new homes were 36 more expensive than comparable new construction as indicated florida 2, 3, 4 architectural 2014 wall street journal nation association of realtors lange individually established the 2014 gap between thirty and 40 percent precisely how much of a diverse

in prices between new and existing pricing a vast yofrt of homes the western neighborhoods were to serve in the mid a 20th century now they serve the highest of the high-end market can be shown as the same a smaller home the larger size often doubles of triples the square footage of an existing home because the new home i'm sorry - ouch the size will be double or triple the square footage this put the new home out of reach for working families the city this next graphic you've seen before san francisco is near the top of list in the encountering income disparity you saw in the paper from we flipped from the

top of list to number 9 not because the top income group they are pulled away from the medium and have the dubious distinction of number one approval thought we push another moderate income family out of the city to make room for those the highest in case based on this the prices with the small home at $1.6 million and the vacant lot at one employed plus both prices is consistent with the neighborhood i think the new 8 thousand square feet home maybe sold of 8 or $9 million conserving and is so-called second unit will not be rented to a family

other speakers this project didn't work. >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. >> commissioners good afternoon. my name is a sam i grew up at 21st street not far from the subject property and went to the public schools in the neighborhood my mom still lives there section 303 of the code requires the proposed feature at the size and intensity contemplated and at the property location will provide a development it is necessary and desirable and comparable with the neighborhood or the community and that such use or feature has proposed will comply that the and i applicable codes and not adversely effect the plan it

conflict with the prominent plan of the neighborhood no interior lots on this adjacent loot have been approved for merge the last half a century and none have been approved in the last 6 years in any housing is more expensive and the sounds like hours is in contradiction contradiction to a plan that calls for the prooefrm and the scale of the proposed building is widely out of scale with the surrounding buildings instead of creating more housing a massively bigger house for few people it is a polar opposite demand a nature of the property but thought neighborhood by insuring only the top 10 percent of the top one percent of the society can live in it and fewer can own it. >> this project is not about

leading the but ego and entitlement and providing other developers justifi a precedence to do that elsewhere this project clearly in meet the standards and stands in contradiction to the important policies that retain to provide his or her own for everyone let me show you graphic two an alternative that the neighbors will accept and perfectly reasonable this is not a case in which the developer can't do a successful project here is the site shown with a modest existence and a modest in any home they fit the top debris and the height and size and will provide two separate families the opportunity to own they mentioned own home and finally

graphic 3 it the ultimately graphic plan that is blurry but respects the is an rear yard and the reduced height will be less i am impactful to the neighborhood. >> can we have the overhead tv people. >> good afternoon commissioner my name is carolyn kennedy's i believe on 21st street i'm a san franciscan i've lived in other parts of the neighborhood and active with the delores your comment on section 317 criteria which you see on this overhead the planner explained in writing when a conditional use is filed for a demolition the finding in

317 they apply to the h mandatory discretionary review the code didn't specific a super majority of the criteria must be met but this is the inspire majority the recent past a majority we don't believe either a super or majority it criteria have been met by the project we nor building that the affordability or neighborhood character should be given more weight here's the 1016 that are not met starting with number 7 this didn't convert existing hours and number 8 the character of the buildings averaging 2 thousand square feet on a prominent lot of 25 square feet no building over 35 hundred square feet on the opposed block

face over 8 thousand square feet it didn't sxheefr the character number 4 is didn't protect the affordability quite the opposite and 10 not adrc affordable units number 11 section 317 the housing element the housing element of the general plan it was this vacant lot was counted as an in file and will be removed by the lot merge and 12 the circumstances allows for one existing home that sustained a modest condition with a single-family that replaces it with a small unit that will never be rented by a family in our opinion number 16 this affordable housing didn't meet i'm sorry number 13, number 14

not a design to meet that criteria and number 15 it increases the housing units and taking takes away a two family and 16 technically the number of bedrooms two 25 hundred square feet will meet that criteria to recap the proposed project didn't meet any of the section 317 for this and other reasons thank you for your time and consideration. >> good evening thosecy with the charm and we watched over the past years and the process have awarded the developers

without arraigning enormous projects that are out of scale they mentioned unbelievable we've watched time and again to make in his opinion and tucks for the monster house to go up or 317 notification the rdt asked for a couple of size go reductions after the considering is filled the commission directs the developer to reduce the size they end the first hearing one or more of you remember the fact that during the second hearing you're spending too time on low density projects instead of more massive eastern neighborhoods promotions that are before you and were you then reluctantly approve are project by the time

the project is issued it is a little bit less worse than coming into the door the developer will put a 5 or 6 figure fee to his land use attorney and laugh to the close of escrow commissioners we ask not just on our own on behalf of but on the on behalf of many western neighborhoods that are losing more of they mentioned charm and character as this process continues to say no and doesn't send this back only to approve a slightly less worse proximate cause at the end of the hearing it is out of scale and unaffordable not meeting the riders findings disapprove that project please we hope you'll find the next developers wouldn't come in the doors with

a 9 thousand square feet home hoping to knock it down to 7 house plus the developers know if they come in the door with a monster home you'll send them packing i promise you they'll start cutting the door with projects that are more in scale and more reasonable and our neighborhoods that be saved you can spend our time making good decisions on good projects making them better as opposed to making projects worse thank you. >> commissioners good afternoon. i'm retro i live on cumberland across the street from the project for the loose 20 years i support all the testimony opposing this project as given by my neighbors it

conflicts with the width and demolished in contradiction to the general plan paroling policy if calls for sound housing preservation and creates a single structure of a structure 8 times the existing homes and 3 times that of homes on the block it is twice the size the block and 3 times the size on the only double lot across the street the scale is clearly not compatible and the subterranean storage rooms will not be housing a family it is urban likely to house a permanent recipient who will not be able to have it only the future s&p sending this basing back it only backroom lobbying it didn't comply that

the general practical policy to retain the housing and it was opposed by the eureka valley association and liberty hill association the next door neighbors that live over also known as support it they mentioned promised a small sobriety that is adjacent to they mentioned rear property lines from an alternative plan the side yard can be maintained not necessary for them to put their interests ahead of over character of the neighborhoods commissioners just say no vote an intent to disapprove and bring it back in two weeks this action didn't conflict with the appeal period a discuss approval will not result from the loss of

housing it will have an existing affordable home and more square footage those two homes will provide homeowners opportunities to two spate families that are more affordable than the 8 thousand square feet in fact, not for two families thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hi i live on 21st street which about a block and a half away from the property i've been active in the neighborhood for 15 years trying to get the neighbors to preserve our special district and not because it is city codes we love that special district i'd like to

talk about precedence you will set a precedence that is the first time in many years that in our neighborhood two lots will be combined to build one big house and as such as my heart goes out to the people that plan this for two years and have they mentioned families and grapples and multiple children it is probably not the neighborhood to do this i'm sad about that as they lost money the process we've been trying to alert the real estate accountants and to the potential buyers this is a special use district if you plan on living there don't plan on being that the guess he pacific heights i'm asking you to a preserve the character of the neighborhood and we have to look

at the overall character of the neighborhood not just one house and two neighbors i appreciate very much the people that point they mentioned friends to live there i want people to live there you should move to a neighborhood that fits the way you want to live there you have to respect the neighborhood will it affect not only the next 5 years it is easy to destroy a neighborhood it takes 4 years and it can be a generation to build a neighborhood to a nice neighborhood we take pride in that, please don't destroy it thank you.

>> good afternoon. commissioners i'm liz clark. >> sfgovtv overhead sfgov. >> my name is liz clark a long time recipient of sanchez street and here in solidarity with any neighbors it oppose this scale of this project it is difficult to understand from thin line drawings the bulk and the glitters of that project at hand over 8 thousand square feet almost 8 three hundred square feet i brought along the same square footage the first one i looked it up it was i'd like to built for a king number two, yes. >> all these are at least 8

three hundred square feet the same size okay 8 thousand square feet this property belongs to enrique in florida and number 3 on the top 10 mansions of the n s l this is the front and the next slide is the back of the one of the top 10 mansions of the nfl located in arizona this next one is owned by and hollywood star light lightwell and lives in the hollywood hills and finally my favorite is a sky report at 8 three hundred square feet the plans before you today are simply a vain attempt to keep up

with the kardashian's but the zuckerberg's please don't let this grossly oversized treasure that is more many line with an office building disrupt a small eco system of this street disrupt those plans we don't want a ski resort no ski resort on cumberland street and it didn't quite snow here yet (laughter) next item, please. >> next item, please. >> oh, and. >> commissioners good afternoon. my name is a joanne king live on sanchez street between me and this

property is a 6 hundred square feet earthquake cottage that was dragged up from delores park at terminal of last century i oppose this project and would like to read into the record an option letter sent to the commissioners on monday march 28 from the liberty hill neighborhood association and reads as follows: dear commissioner president fong and members of the planning commission the liberty hill neighborhood association strengthly opposed the conditional use application for 323 cumberland which is on our upcoming agenda this coming

thursday we firmly support the reasons positions taken by the delores heights improvement club the eureka valley neighborhood association, and the most recent letter from protect noah's charm from easy room we find no need to repeat well researched reasons put forgettable the statement we join in i deny the conditional use application for this project and lot merge lint hill is a neighborhood and a historic preservation district we've experienced first hand the unfortunate consequences when neighbors are ignored as might want hearings and buildings are approved way too big and

completely out of character with the rest of the neighborhood every inappropriate structure situated over neighborhood by adrc to the socio and inequality we're experiencing and similarly every approval industries the aesthetics and attendance to there will that gives me san francisco neighborhoods worldwide respect for they mentioned interests and design question yes, ma'am thavl oppose this and ask i deny the conditional use authorization president liberty hills neighborhood association. >> thank you.

>> thank you. >> afternoon i'm carl i'm here to read a letter prepared by the diana that lives on cumberland which is kitty-corner from the 323 cumberland's the 8 thousand mega home she had to say i strongly oppose to the lot mergers which is public policy is best served by one single-family on each lot of the experiences are sponsors are land hogs i oppose the demolition of the existing housing this which is against the established public policy it is a sounds home but from the commissioners decide to allow this disaster by approving a demolition and the lot merge you should recognize that 8 thousand square feet is too

large a neighborhoods who is guidelines limit size to 8 thousand plus square feet of interior living area that way that will fit into the scale of a neighborhood and she said ann as an afterthought money alone shouldn't dictate the size of that home thank you very much. >> thank you. >> commissioner president fong and supervisors. >> sfgovtv overhead. >> i've lived in the area for 35 years the issue of that project size has been raised by other for very good reasons you've heard, however, some planners say this building size is not regulated by square footage and this is for the true please consider the integral

parts of neighborhood and affordability this slide shows square footages the top two blocks of pacific heights the bottom is the project block the afternoon home of pays off is 5 thousand plus square feet the average home around the project site is less than 2 thousand square feet no buildings on cumberland over 200 square feet and many homes on the pacific well over 3 thousand plus, in fact, half a dozen are over 8 thousand square feet as you may know most lots on cumberland have 25 percent a typical lot on cumberland is 2 thousand plus the lot sizes on the blocks of pacific run to over 10 thousand square feet the 50 percent of

interior is between 4 thousand easing and 7 thousand square feet the home prices are the average about $4 million and run to $10 million a great place for a trophy home as you can see by any 91 number of measures that matches pacific heights but it didn't fit into one of the housing characterization of our neighborhood lot or pricing this is a project that belongs in pacific heights not here please disapprove. >> sfgovtv overhead. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is renee i've lived directly from the project for 8

years mime work for health care i've seen first hand the benefit of people's well-being studies show that in each lowers the heart rate and helps to people to heal the beautiful gardens and sweeping views makes liberty hill an iconic neighborhoods including those that walk they mentioned dogs and exercise and live the area i'm here to speak for a sixth tree a monterey cypress i see at night with a multiple of birds and hawks and ravens and parrots they'll be killed by the project the trees rise up from the backyard an sanchez behind 311 cumberland it

is visible and you may have noticed the trees on the northern see of sanchez backyard and the architecture renderings are incorrect plaza the tree at the edge of 660 farther from the project the owners on sanchez wrote and letter supporting this project gained the neighborhoods support for they mentioned excavation they will upon finding any two inch root of they mentioned tree upon excavation they mentioned diego a wedge to create the underground units that reaches 10 feet away from the trees man trunk an arborist described the root ball of a cypress extends one foot for every inch of trunk

dynamics this should be 36 feet of bracketing space to survive with that project current configuration the excavation on is an that will have a 20 footed coffin surrounding that it will be hard to survive the construction will crush or cut off the roots and the project will significantly wall off most of its light you can see by the photos please deny it conditional use killing the tree not desirable the assistant necessary and not comparable with the context and scale of the neighborhood thank you very much. >> good evening.

>> projector sfgovtv. >> okay. good afternoon, commissioners i'm edward mason i live a few blocks away from the project and also in noah valley as a lifetime recipient the project sponsor has tried to make a big deal of the fact there are over 50 wide lots on two blocks adjacent to the proposed project that are 4 of these lots out of 88 total here are the facts of the 5 lots lot 15 has a 35 hundred square feet structure for two units lot 16 is 21 hundred feet for 3 units 38 has 2200 square feet for one unit and lot 34 is about 2 thousand square feet with one unit and lot 65 has a 3 thousand square feet structure with 4 units no buildings even close to 8

thousand square feet that comes from the city's records also thild to read a letter from you don't know who lives on 20th street his letter of opposition to the planning commission as a homeowner at 20 street located one block away from the project i oppose oppose the plan on cumberland an 8 thousand square feet house is out of the scale and character of the neighborhood and reduces the vertebral housing by combining separate lots is contrary to the best interests of people struggling to find housing in the city we support our neighbors for they mentioned opposition and thank you for your time seller john thank you very much.

>> hello good afternoon, commissioners i've also in noah valley since i moved there in 1976 and i know cumberland street a side street that is narrow and off delores street opt from delores park and when we look at the houses you see a lot of flats and some homes that are all the same acquaints style if you go that looks like a glass frontage that is architect has shown you the property oversized house is contingent on merging

two side by side lost their not often heard of in our neighborhood our approval of this conditional use will set and very bad precedence and then i'm commenting about the little underground units trying to pass up a basement dungeon as a viable housing unit to awe sausage you is ridiculous it didn't answer the housing stock we spell need for a fact building one giants house reduces that why not develop two units on these lots these owners slash developers are deep pockets and have even used it as leverage to get their way in they mentioned attempt to try to achieve they're fair tail dre

dream. >> good afternoon. i'm elizabeth i live across the street from the project on cumberland's i would like to make some comments quickly from the heart i think i can speak for many of my neighbors we adore this neighborhood we love the charm of that the history of it the character of it the style of that and we have a connection to the historical of this neighborhood and - it - the neighborhood has a consistency that is charming that many people are coming walking through the neighborhood to see

that that is part of delores heights preservation district it is tremendously troubling to see a huge industrial sized box coming in this neighborhoods and this one it is most extreme that has been proposed i am hoping that i will protect us from this kind of development and change which really unfortunately is threatening very much of our life in our neighborhood and our communities and i'm continually baffled by

people that choose to move to the neighborhoods and make some violent changes to the character or hope to make violate changes to the charm and character of our homes and our community thank you very much. >> good evening, commissioners i think i'm the last of this group i've lived in neighborhoods for 50 years one house away from the projected project on the corner there at 80 years old i don't expect to be around a long time my partner and i raised three children we love the neighborhoods our children love the neighborhoods. >> grandchildren we'll not be

around across the street is diane who wrote in opposition of this she's a little bit younger but her son lives elsewhere next to the projected prompt a home owned by shelly and richard those of whom are elderly and shelly is old that house will be sold you think of this precedent we're trying to fight against this home will be built on one side a couple that will not be with us and one house away i'm not going to be around and across the street if you allow this precedent to occur the developers will have one leg and that area will be destroyed thank you. >> hello my name is mark you

actually have a letter written by richard limp that was mentioned i'm immediately to the rest richard was here the room but unfortunately his wife is ill her caregiver called and richard had to leave i have this on the piece of paper my name is richard my wife and i live only cumberland the house neighboring the proposed home next door the past two years many meetings with them rewarding the house plan we say concerns of the assess during the construction they've literally adopted the plans and we're satisfied i like combining the two lots and the setbacks of the house the inclusion of trees started the streets to reduce the impact of the promoted housing is a good idea i'm confused about the

plans think papers because of the changes but i'm confident those plans will urban design acceptable my concerns are with the people that live there i'm sure they'll be good neighbors signed richard lynch if i may it is just that 25 hundred square feet house in noah valley is probably not an affordable house and i don't think that is what this is about and as long as this goes on that house is not complete. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong i'm justin microscopes we are the owners of the house immediately to the east and as mentioned the cypress tree we want to speak to first, we and the other properties just the size of ours

are the most effected in terms of the light in the backyard and too from the construction of tree i want to speak if whorled support and in full disclosure with a full relationship i worked with them to contrary the air so a couple of things to address 3 other neighbors unfortunately they were not able to be here to speak but we spoken with them they they mentioned comfortable with us speaking on their behalf they made a process starting two years ago the community neighborhoods we purchased our property and you know they've done i think 5 rounds or architecture to the property and the feedback open to february we'll have a ton of dialogue and widow that with the others no the neighborhood i appreciate that people are upset due to the

size but the grades portion is 45 hundred square feet not 8 thousands square feet and note to the previous speakers comment we end up having the good fortune paying over $2,000 a square foot didn't seem a formable argument make sense you're asking the commission to approve that it is some feedback unfortunately, the delores heights club you've heard from have an unbiased point of view it is disturbing they are sorted to block busting this is personal that is i think comprehensive to my wife and i on behalf of the neighborhood to theth and he appreciate how considerate and look forward to this beautiful home and this

neighborhood i hope you approve that today thank you. >> hi my name is annabel i live on sanchez with my husband who spoke our backyard is adjacent to the proposed side yard i'm here to speak in supportive this faces our front yard i think that is a pretty nice 0 was he proposed a setback and i can't suppress how much that means it allows for more life enrichment committee and is a respect full decision on their part we know this is a a highly personal project none will experience that on two lots with one structure for everything else they'll be staring at a

ones vacant lot that's the difference between a small one that will change the feel of our yard i know we're still relating new to the neighborhoods but we hope our experience of our home didn't count for less of a result beyond that i want to reiterate i wrote something in my letter the supports preserving the character of a neighborhood is much more than the house the neighbors will bring character it is simple the house proposed is the one we want to see built and the people we want to see living there thank you. >> i live in the neighborhoods on twikt and sanchez i'm speaking in supportive of the

proposed project my husband and i have a small son and trying for a second child delores height is would have we ended up remodeling unfortunately people opted to leave san francisco san francisco has the lowest percentage of children in any city in the country categorizing to the spur article the two reasons people need a beggar home and children need space to run around if you have large families with graemz i need room as a city we need to design houses that are appropriate for people and they mentioned niece this has two important objectives it provides two units for single-family homes and second a two bedroom units that

be irish-american more affordable and only one house on two loss all the just a few minutes neighbors that are impacted the most want to see a single-family home but the dr requesters want to see two units by having two units in a single building the project insures no loss of housing due to the merge and allows them to build a smaller footprint the adjacent neighborhoods it appropriate for that the neighborhoods this clearly is a win-win for everyone i'd like to state for the record i support this and thank you for your time. >> good evening i live the neighborhood i'm going to be reading a few

states from neighbors and provided in paper form excerpts including some of the adjacent neighbors to justin and annabel the folks that live adjacent richie met with us in addition to organizing several neighborhood meeting we appreciate the setback on the east and the front that has ruled in good separation from our proposals and protects the light and privacy from the deck one recipient is better than two separate buildings two knows will is a large footprint we look forward to having them as neighborhoods ken the adjacent property owner i'm writing to indicate my support i appreciate

you were sensitive to the neighbors bordering our property and selected a 14 foot setback from the property line resulting in a house with a smaller footprint the just a few minutes property sanchez wrote we've seen the plans for the proposed project and very much are they've. the design changes we believe the proposed design is eloquent and will enhance our neighborhood michael jar at cumberland wrote we're strongly in favor of allowing this without future glai delay is a better house and it fits in with the neighborhoods it is well-designed without being intrusive or eventually patrick think you cumberland wrote that neighborhood has many homes we feel it fits in with

the character of the neighborhood and appreciate they choose to build a smaller home than otherwise loudly and sensitive to the neighborhood leon cumberland wrote we believe that the house is well-designed we like the use of wood and the sbtsdz we prefer the construction of a single home and paul on sanchez wrote my wife and i find the design to be great and we're excited to have a little on the same block and appreciate they've not asked for single various they've been welcoming from our feedback over the course of the property and residents liberty road we believe that is well-designed and fits in the character of the neighborhoods we're happy to see the lots marked >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> thank you.

>> commissioners my name is adams i live down the hill i've been the area for 10 years i've known them for an desire 10 years they care about the community and helping people in general worked an important issues improving schools and gentrification and attest in their the kind of neighbors you can trust to take care of our children my wife and i have a child they've been generous with they mentioned time and with us during my wife's pregnancy i think they're the kind of people i like to have as neighbors been difficult so see though this is for everyone involved i've seen first hand for them

i've talked with them how to modify they mentioned design and particular focus on those living adjacent i think as a testament to they mentioned effort everyone adjacent to the property is for the project i think in addition on the specifics of the project i'd like to call if they've asked for no variance and they've chosen to have various setback they mentioned sensitive to the neighborhoods and protect about the neighborhoods light and privacy and views i think that is for the commission recognizes that it gives san francisco residents the confidence they mentioned respectfully the rules with the planning department in conclusion i'd like to simply say i'm in support of project

and thank you for your time. >> hello commissioner, i live flaesh i've common them for 8 years and also in the city for 9 years i just want to say a couple of things about they mentioned character and the nature of the debate they mentioned stall warmth members of the community they have brought a lot of jobs and activities to the city richie is heavily involved in the community and i've had the opportunity to work with her as well they're amazing people i'll not consider them developers they mentioned definitely looking to build this home as they mentioned own and to live there for a long time i think they intend to make san francisco they mentioned home

not only for they mentioned homes but extended family and children in addition i'll say that you know the affordability argument didn't ring true for me as a resident of the neighborhood i've especially seen a lot of development of luxury condo and other things the neighborhood i'll say that you know a lot that sold to richie i think for $2 million with no house on that i don't think there's a world that exists that can be considered affordable and so urge you guys to not pay too much heed to the arguments the other argument i'd like to make the housing stock is not going to be effected by this were there was one home on two lots there will now be two homes on one lot that is a considered a win in terms of the mass for how

many housing units and the affordability argument is not there someone with a middle-income can't afford that land and house as it is now and nothing changes in that department i urge you guys to support the project and thank you for your time. >> hi i live at 21st street i'll be speaking in support of this project as you can see the generation divide the cloud about the new and old people and the people are lived there for a long time we came to a place we had a lot of questions about ties whether they taublgdz to the neighbor or the day he answered they mentioned concerns and we were

satisfied by the effort he made i went to the site i don't take that lightly i looked at the neighbors the soufrndz block and reviewed the staff report, the neighbors concerns and also the plan of the project and after considering all that i decided to support this project and i think this project will be a great addition to the neighborhood my biggest concern was the lot they've done a job of adding a units my neighbors say it is not a great place to live but i'd be happy to live there, there would be a lot of people happy to live there we don't have a housing tie that fits the style we have hours and

large hours we have hours that as big as that hours they're proposing and small apartment buildings and a lot of that buildings that have fifth story stories and two public buildings in front of our house they belong to the neighborhoods and we have more than stipulated buildings and we have some overlooking houses and you know, i think and some buildings are vertical and they mentioned design and some horizontal this eclectic mix makes the neighborhood grand lastly i'm uncomfortable that meier my neighbors are saying only small houses are loud in the city this is city and not just an neighborhood i understand they mentioned concern i know that is difficult

but very troubdz by this business create this cost the city a lot of money and created an invisual wall that keeps people out thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners attorney-client i'll try to keep this brief i'm a red creature the room i'm a renter and most likely a renter the city i'm here to express my support for this proposed project because i want to share with you a more true characterization of the people submitting they mentioned proposal preserving the character and honoring and having a heritage the neighborhoods makes san

francisco so strong in addition embracing people of a willingness to make they mentioned communities reflect they mentioned generosities is of great importance i'll encourage you to consider a more accurate characterization of the spokesman i've known them over a decade they have approached this with a very deep commitment to building multiple generations of a family in a city they love and cherish it is rare i'll encourage you to take into consideration especially in a time when more and more projects that come before you a proxy for large forces it is important to acknowledge that the try characterization of the two people that are presenting this before you are not developers but people that deeply care

about the community and work everyday to make sure this community reflect what they see to ideal thank you for your time. >> hello, i have - >> notice the building in processing and talk about to the contractors and this is been you know school i've been going to school everyday and doing any duties as you know, a manager and the property - school - i mean, there's really serious you know with construction and building in housing in new ways

as i guess i put together you know maybe you need more structures i have you know intended to relieve control on our abuse which has been opposed and i feel strong with the beauty of living in the better homes i don't know why this has to be you know to where there is i've every house and council is i mean what is you know is the problem here living in a beautiful world and a beautiful house is you know there is some

problem you know, i think that beautiful things are more successful then things that don't make sense at the board of supervisors this is now something that you probably already know that can do a big old thing on what i tried to do because of some kind of hearing you know processing which i have found for about you know then differences of the planning processes is that has a lot of requirements and i think this has been a totally - which will

be starting the first place you've planned on all along especially in an airport ride folks in washington, d.c. and i was there in the hospital and you know just not to the point where, you know, army - >> hi supervisors i'm nina i owner a homeowner cumberland i feel the sponsors made they mentioned home compatible and they've organized many meetings with not only the architect by the civil engineer and they've tried to meet all the concerns

of they mentioned neighbors they want to live here for the next 20 or thirty years the neighbors are in supports of it and feel like you know the delores heights has not taken the time to talk to us that supports the project and that the neighborhood is not being represented equally we have a bunch of double lots on the block including my own lot i feel like this project will fit in with that kind of space and they've you know tried they mentioned best to fulfill all the immediate adjacent neighbors needs as well as make

the building fully code compliant and despite the constraints they've created for space and setback the building for more green space i think at the end of the day the building looks like a two-story building that is compatible i find the style very nice so i enjoy that and looks forward to walking past that house and the view on cumberland most importantly that is preferable to having two guidance block houses and that is taking up more space than one house individually takes up i also feel that one of the things that kind of getting lost in the conversation it operationally is the fact that

traditionally in an indian family altercation folks will live with they mentioned children we don't send our parents to nursing homes that is something that does you know they do because they can afford it but it is cultural and we need to make our neighborhood really acceptable to varying cultural that are much you know come with much larger families and bigger needs than existing homes thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners thank you i am francesca a renter also one of the few here i live around the corner an 20th street despite claims that have been

made in support there are no houses that are 18 i'm sorry 8 thousand plus square feet in size there are maybe two or three apartment buildings that were the cause of creating the f u d in 1980 and not true all just a few minutes neighbors are supporting this project on neighbors to the east and the west of the proposed property all the just a few minutes neighbors to the south and all neighbors directly across the street oppose the project and those neighbors are effected now i'll read a letter on behalf of someone that couldn't be here david we have writing to express our concerns for people we are writing to express our concerns for the plans think cumberland we live across the street and

deeply have felt in the health of the neighborhood we welcome the comments but feel the neighborhoods character is not guaranteed to survive without shipyard a primary concern the size and monoelective nature our street is not one of theism posing structure we feel in love with our homes 25 hundred square feet and, in fact, one of the larger houses on cumberland's the size of a small cottage with o 1 full floor street level and a donor merry windows above the house is not much diversities from when it was built in 1916 the existing house at 323 cumberland is similar the scale with welfarism block ways and plantings as currently proposed on cumberland presents a radical

changes unlike the houses it makes no effort to mask into the rhythm of the street they express they mentioned desire to live the neighborhoods this is inconsistent with the proposed design and we worry about the precedence it is setting we have particularly a strong concern the excavation that places square footage underground with this massing that raises the integrity of the hill i did valuable seats for the large trees and safety in an earthquake zone that be compromised a long standing proposal. >> thank you, ma'am. >> okay. good bye (laughter). >> maybe a nice way to ends

is there any additional public comment? >> good evening georgia swedish according to the housing element the homeowners is down in san francisco since 2000 we all know the importance of homeowners to our economy perhaps the decrease in overflow room has to do with with the increase in pricing prices the housing especially in noah valley where i live for thirty years as a homeowner are 18 hundred square feet and this is how many families that are lucky enough to live in san francisco live citywide as you heard from our own report since 2008 there were only 37 lot mergers and 16 in the rh district with property line adjustment there is no merge

like this one not one approving the merge of the rh225 by one and 14 lots is unprecedented instead please provide housing for two families with one family lot the house at 3 it 3 shouldn't be dooshdz we assume that is sound seized within 50 thousands of current moh affordability map expands through 23 to a legal code compliant alteration without a demolition the 313 lot must remain as a discrete lot that's been forever build a modern single-family homes for a modern family with 3 thousand square feet within the delores heights giles this be

contradicts almost all the city's policy two single-family homes will not require a cu the second unit the proposed project is bizarre can easily be absorbed into the mega building avoid the precedence of a historical unnecessary lot merge a reduction in density contrary to the zoning a project out of character for the neighborhood and the demolition of a sounds relatively affordable housing that is four precedence you could break if you approve those are precedence that fly the face of the mayor's promise at the second annual a promise to on this promote hours that didn't hurt the city thank you very much is there any public comment not seeing any, public comment

is closed. and opening up to commissioner comments. >> commissioner moore. >> a lot of homework has looked at the issues i appreciate the clarity by which of the majority of you elevated beyond frorj it at the cu i'm actually surprised this project has not done more between january 28th and today the cu is a cu that is necessary and desirable and i think this project for me misses the mark particularly given the instructions by which we kindly gave it a second bite of the apple in january the architect made a comment that if you listened raised everybody's alarm and he spoke about the 5 thousand square foot

above grade that is the fundamental problem the project has not changes the discussion about modern architecture and out of discussion but the champ we pose in january was adding the unit adding this unit was not only in terms of square footage but where it sits in the building and at this moment is the dwelling earlier today when we discussed little h little consent project taken off of consent with grandview i talked about the garden unit people were saying that is the ground and that project was not buried the groin that is at grades in the rear and the front of the building was partially they take advantage of it being level but when you look at the section

drawing of this building you are basically in a ditch and so the entire 15 hundred plus square feet are a cave dweblg that in addition to what looks like a pan contacted exceptional large project is large to rise to the necessary and desirable discussion we're supposed to view as criteria for approving this i'm further pained by the fact that that has spent 4 hours on the problems of housing and i'm not going to get into the dealers how that applies and not applies the bigger part of legislation didn't apply, however, the discussion will the roof costs of housing the city this project falls the middle of that and mr. - mr. washington

you're wondering why i'm saying this the reason is when we have a merge we'll approve a lot merge what we need at provision of liveable and quality units and because of what i described this unit just didn't meet that particular requirements so what scott wiener we have a intrusive and i think a self-centered building i believe the building from age architectural point of view is tool in the tool belt over windows by all the descriptions of why we were we want windows i'll caution that significant light pollution and overall the project really didn't have the fin us of the larger buildings we've seen and approved have achieved the

neighborhood when we look at larger buildings and met the criteria at at least we approved the exceptional architecture we don't have that. >> with all due respect my record shows that is the first hearing continues from february 4th without a hearing because of the commission you may be confusing it with 32 ord. >> we had the same situation. >> didn't you encourage that building i'll see if i did somehow. >> it seems to me that has been here before and asked for a second reading. >> no another one. >> i take that back i apologize. >> we've been sitting here talking about two projects for 6 and a half hours i apologize no

offense thank you. i acknowledge that i pull that comment back the issue remains that a proportionately sized or a appropriately postponed to be a liveable units. >> you suggested that we again take distraction that we again do enough this is our first hearing. >> i appreciate your comments mr. reuben it was not meant to be presently many people have projects that listen to other projects i don't have to defend myself that the cu and as proposed this didn't meet the criteria of the large family units with two larger bedrooms is the large - that's the

position. >> commissioner antonini. >> i understand the confusion one reason there was an earlier renderings of it and the original rendition if center a second unit and, in fact, that was code compliant and would have been a dr would not have been here with a cu only a cu because of the lot size that demanded that both of those lots be big enough not small enough the opposite of what everyone's is assessing we need it bigger because they have two units and 57 hundred square feet they're below the 3 thousand lot size per units that is causing the needs for the conditional use and i know i did actually talk with the property owners and say the rendition the smaller unit

and courageous them to put in a family-sized or large units which they've done i was up on cumberland very charming street a little bit hard to find i walked from the lower part of cumberland i wouldn't find out how to diversify it is extremely charming it was kirk to hear the sponsors from the friends and family men's about the families that stay together into generation all i think some of the social problems might be less if we have families that had they mentioned parents and grandchildren in close proximity not necessarily in the same house but strange families where people are left on they mentioned own as seniors are

younger sherz stares and in the case talking about the project this whole idea this house is a dump left of it and an empty lot i mean, it was not genocide to be affordable even in the current state but of it is close to the affordable line nobody in they're right mind let's assume the proponents prevailed and the property owner will weighing would we'll keep the house it will be expensive none will keep that house after paying a huge amount of money or represent it are sell it. a low cost will not happen we can't solve that housing crisis on a small project that comes before us this is a big issue and one of the issues we don't have larger homes are larger

families that leave them they can afford to do so and go to places they ask purchase larger homes the other thing oftentimes i'll drive home and drive through st. francis woods they have very large homes they're not threatening they're beautiful and have trees that do well, i mean nothing inherently wrong with large homes the issue surrounding a precedent this might set i know there are a series of affordable lots in the area but most of them are already buy out that would be different with two a double lot and someone wanting to merge them as opposed to a empty lot next door and the builders did a good job by

keeping is low i murder that auto other 33.5 height i'm sure that is accurate people talk about 50 feet i don't know where that is coming from and fairly in height and respect and leaving sergeants around the adjacent homes, go the back putting a lot of the subterranean in the backyard so it doesn't impose on the rear yards or on the key way lots coming from sanchez so thankful done a lot of good things and i think they're being respectful the just a few minutes one question i have for project sponsor is the second units is it going to be it will be a straight unit and separate address i assume >> yes. that's correct and that's what the code requires as well and no entry from the second units look at the plans

into the units. >> a separate address and as simple it would be sold or could be rented it depends on you know how the builder chooses to do it. >> i've not talked about with the owners about mapping it, yes that's correct. >> sir, i would think it should be mapped. >> we'll have that conversation and any concerns about that is not separate if so it did mapped not has to be sold but allowed to be sold. >> yes. >> that's an important consideration and some of the other issues came up about the cypress tree the owners the house where the tree are not concerned i'm sure we can be careful how the excavation ands trees are roots in different direction and not likely if we carefully build and disturb a cough of the roots

they don't want a big house but i don't see life enrichment committee disturbing the neighborhood it is a well built they know i'm you know that unit is somewhat sub grade and a little bit of a concern we have a lot of units of that type i'm sure staff is supportive of the project and maybe they can talk about the enclosure for that blower units. >> can they made did open space a quarter of the rear yard it is a shared common rear yard. >> yeah. from the sides you're saying a quarter leaving light and air. >> it is access to the rear

yard with the open space requirements but they meet it though the windows in the front room the bedroom. >> it seems to me looking at the drawings the pictures that separation on the thinking the east side is fairly large you'll have a fairly good-sized area allowing windows of the units to look out would that area; is that correct. >> illness how many windows. >> the project architect. >> anthony we specifically had expressed some concerns about this lower recipient will meet the exposure requirements i think the architect will be ready to answer any questions. >> maybe we should do that right now so not to discuss it anymore. >> tell me again, the exposure. >> the 3 rooms that have

exposure the fronts bedroom opens on the front yard and to the east opens into the 5 foot by 12 foot in towards the rear yard and the main living space opens on to 7 and a half by 10 foot well, that fits at the center of that space i'd like to note that the request see for the second units came from planning department staff very late after the filing of the dr we did our best to incorporate but further interested in improving the exposure into the light felt rarnld we gambled the opportunity to work with staff to open that well within the living spaces towards the rear yard it will take more time but certainly we want to improve the quality of that. >> the more we can let light into that the better it will be

thank you very much. >> thank you. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> interestingly enough we've heard a lot i hate to see neighborhoods not coming to an agreement this project is not about a root issue i teach actually, i didn't have any coffee a nice person i think that is not about money this is a pure land use decision he passed the test when i mend the heights he said i like this neighborhood i live a half a block away my first with an on 19th street this reminds me of a situation on lloyd street a house with a vacant lot and the same thing was proposed by a

builders or project sponsor with they mentioned intent and intended up the lot merge never happens based on the input from the neighborhoods and kept the original house and built built a second house and everyone was happy the second question why not try to build a 45 thousand square feet on the vacant lot with with respect to the neighbors and get rid of the other house the other house will be similar size and have everyone sing kumbaya. >> do you mind mr. reuben if he answers that. >> we had a list of potential questions we would be asked. >> was that one of them.

>> that was close enough i said it the opening the problem is that so use a phrase you can't say please all the people all the time and started the process to reach out to the neighbors to please the adjacent neighbors or the rest of the frankly not so impacted you know a sense from the rest of the neighbors than a direct impact so the decision was made to merge the lots and build a bigger house if they turned around and built a large house on one lot they'll lose the neighbors on the vacant lot they've pleased and be here bay those neighbors did a very good job i've attended the meeting they have great graphics i

commend them they spent a lot of time with the dew care but instead of it being them it would be the adjacent neighbors that support the project. >> maybe this is not on your list we don't have a role we have things the parts intended consequences snowballed and one of the examples we'll have to start it as a small thing and someone said this fire started we'll have to put it out can you help me out under reuben 3 buildings in the neighborhood that are any elderly folks when i was walking any doggy helped the neighb to the west up to the i helped him up the steps let's assume was the assistant living folks comes on the market and somebody says we want to buy

the house with an oh, they can't refuse where does this he said the neighbors provided the lot mergers and make substandard lots bigger this is kind of like this the last 10 years and where does it ends i mean. >> i'm not sure it ever evens this is a very long conversation i'd be delighted to have not at the mike. >> i understand so perhaps that was rhetoric. >> it was okay one of the other concerns one observation is we've had projects before in this general area some were big and the monsters home legislation that supervisor mr. sweeney starts literally around the corner i participated in 199 5e9 2000

thank god for the go tech bubble it went on and we're here 15 years later with the same issue all over the sigh city i've not seen a neighborhood so galvanizing this is not what i call a town hall association somebody they- really is united four successors that are represented coming out against is that says a lot to me, too i think if anything i have several pages of notes every time we have a project that comes like in the tenderloin last week before the

opening lien the project sponsor it is an in file project oh, this is where the city want to go to build on empty lots and one unit i get the mapping i have a hard time understanding how the unit would be working separately but still raise a large policy issue and want to hear what the next commissioners say commissioner johnson. >> thanks very much. >> thank you. >> thanks very much yeah, i'll dovetail on commissioner vice president richards i heard the public comment i sat the room with the tv heard everyone that came up to speak

we had kind of sort of 60, 40 split with the people supporting and not supporting unfortunately for the 60 sort of percentage came out and didn't support project i didn't hear anything consistent enough for it to really somewhat my decision one way or another but not a drumbeat of one person after the next saying the exact same thing some people said a monsters home too big and others that is some should be a single-family home and two family some people were more about not the size but the design and fortunately, i didn't hear anything consistent to drive a decision in one direction or the other for that reason i have to go back to the the distance and with this project i'm not sure this one

contributes to where you are overall conversation of lot mergers those are a little bit smaller lots lots with the size of a project that can contain that's why we're looking at a conditional use they mentioned sort of that aspect of you know lot merge in addition we've spoken about always wanted r wanting to see the gentrification so i feel like the balance is maintained in that aspect so then i go to how does the actual project work if it is didn't necessarily violate any of our policy goals i've heard discussed and i haven't heard one thing in particular from people in opposition to the project when i look at the project itself generally speaking it works i have a couple of questions about the design i understand this was closer to a last minute changes

with a second units your requested by the planning department to look at this in february over a month or so to work on it versus i think two years we've looked at the prestige before so i get that and hope in terms of exposure or design you'll look at this i have a couple of questions the first one is about parking generously speaking commissioner vice president richards we know we want to see less parking but because of the way the building is skate you have a driveway and not direct assess to the building with go houses is that a conscious choice if we're going to be honest about having

a two bedroom units on the basement floor being a dwelling unit we have a consider the types of if we're live there and if this is not able to reduce the parking not have a driveway which we should look at whether we can reduce that. >> we can assign one of the car spaces the garage and provide into the lower units. >> yes. maybe having a two by the way, locking doors will really know a long ways. >> i'll be happy to do that. >> again, i understood your answer on exposure of the units i looked it was when i look at the side view and look at the plan is definitely looks like it is the ground and looks like a capable a little bit but i see there is definitely the windows

and again, i know you have that sort of courtyard skylight action happening about the living room and dining room you might capitalized that there's not enough light spot bedrooms whatever you can do there and then my on the question about accessibility commissioner vice president richards mentions there was elderly person he was in the neighborhood helping up the stairs both of the units have stairways the only way to assess them going through the garage and up the stairs to get to the larger the larger units and so i might challenge you to think about sergeant sdaeblt r

accessibility. >> commissioner hillis i appreciate the testimony i visited some of the neighbors it was a a long time ago when we talked about this project i want to commend even e everything for being civil in the discussions and talking about the policies and the project itself i had higher hopes we would come to some agreement the convening time but does necessarily happen that is an unusual project we typically have the adjacent neighbors that are against it so we're working to tweak and make changes with the savings accounts taking you off floors or decks we're the reverse situation the adjacent neighbors

that supportive to the broader neighborhood seemingly not so, so there's not a lot of room to make tweaks to the project or significant changes to it to make it work for one party or the other i find middle-income in a thuvenz up or down that is especially given the project complies with the code and you know, i that we're here on the cu not because of the massing or the size of the house it is a large house no doubt we can debate whether or not someone needs that large of a house but there's really nothing in the code are our land use kind of tool kit to say this

should be smaller i feel we can reject this project and some basis for doing that i don't think we'll get two cottages on those lots given the prices and what we see and a wide array of architecture we'll see something akin to the two houses down the street but i think that's what we get if we reject this project not coming back to have a cottage and a 25 hundred square feet home that is the reality i think i have to deal with in deciding whether or not to support or reject this some questions for the architect and this is from the idea of this units that was added

which i think there is some good things 0 so say and bad things you've discussed some of the negative things about the liveability and it would be nice to see this living room and dining room room area not looking at a lightwell do you have ideas about >> the endangering of that well to a regard scale and the setting back of the rear yard will actually be open to the rear yard and stepped planters that going or goes to the higher portion of the hillside. >> so to the lightwell and exactly and to date we're in an area that is slightly beyond the rear yard so someone will have to be working with the staff to see we're working and from

desire to open that rear area. >> how did this area change with the addition felt units what was in those spaces before the lower portion was a mechanical and storage and habitual space - we introduced the smaller units and took back the space short of those assess the lower garage and dedicated them to the second units autopsy when you approached the design of this building i think the earth is good i like the design ensue the horizontal nature of the structure you you know when you looked at this and kind of the large for this the 50 foot square feet and what was around contextually why accident you go

in that direction instead of breaking down of the magnificence more vertical. >> i think the typical split in the vertical direction the clients were not interested but horizontally into the landscape i want to emphasis the lot is developing foot widest on two setbacks 40 feet wicket and this is the primary front volume and a 11 and a half volume we're reduced to the scale in light of the discussion with the 50 foot roof is not true we have a split thirty foot and 11 mass that feels appropriate for the stepping of the lot size or so around the neighborhoods. >> yeah. i mean, i think this is a tough decision but given the fact this you know project

is in code compliant is alternative we'll be back here talking about a less desirable project unless you're a a substandard lot we do this ever week the elevated lot costs one point one million dollars or whatever the price i think further design work with the neighbors and the improvement of that ground floor unit is necessary but germany think i'm responsive of the project. >> commissioner antonini. >> i feel the same way we're gaining two units both are larger the hope there that's a

good thing and the nearest neighborhood support the most impacted i didn't see any arguments other than the fact the house has a lot of square feet i didn't don't know why it shouldn't be built and like to go ahead and move to approve with the project sponsor continuing to work with staff to create better exposure for the second unit and in no way diminish the square footage on the second unit work with staff and were you may be able to find a way to increase that and bring it closer to 2 thousands square feet one to one parking to allow the two units to have a parking space basically that's my motion. >> commissioner moore. >> i want to repeat any comments about the sub standard

the bedrooms are 11 feet in the main house the bedrooms is 179 feet wide so minimal you couldn't identify a master bedroom and even there is a upstairs and downstairs ment outlet is difficult to support by this commission given the minimal housing it is a charge we have i think by ignoring that we're not look at this i want to look it in a fair and comparable way we're creating a problem and cross purpose by not requiring this unit to become a more liveable unit when you look at the window pattern where the majority of windows are facing the long corridor i find this entire lay out unacceptable i

know that in i've from the upper building drives this i'm sure the residential design team find it acceptable so i can't say support the project unless that is look at the completely diversities attitude but about how and what form we're adrc a second unit it doesn't matter about the size or is location and generally, the sizings of rooms integral for families. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> yes. mr. reuben a question for you. >> it looks like you've got support from the project the question i have is if you were to go back and take some the feedback from commissioner moore maybe others feedback we have here to maybe work with some of the neighbors to help make that read more like two units with an

upstairs downstairs would you be okay coming back in a couple of weeks if we voted to continue it. >> we are fine with the motion including a requirement we continue to work with the staff i don't think we will want to agree to come back. >> thank you to the motion maker i would offer an agreement to instruct project sponsor to work with the staff to create two distinct doorways on the level it reads as two unions rather than going on a setback to get into the unit clearly we're trying to create two units we talked about creating a second units i don't see much harm usually when we compare that i offer that is an amendment and second thing city