president, commissioners, my name is robert denuncio. my wife and i retired at 33 lloyd street, the property adjacent to the east of the proposed project. on 14 october last, this commission wisely and with great specificity

president, commissioners, my name is robert denuncio. my wife and i retired at 33 lloyd street, the property adjacent to the east of the proposed project. on 14 october last, this commission wisely and with great specificity instructed the developers and neighbors to confer on a new design that should result in two 3-bedroom units that were compatible with our small street. the planning department generously hosted meetings between the developers and the neighbors to this end. and i would like to think the department, and especially mr. aaron starr. the developers chose to redesign the building without our input, shrinking down the height but maintaining the fourth floor. at the meeting, the developers challenged us to design a three- story building with two 3- bedroom units, saying it cannot be done. as a reminder, this is what most of the commissioners asked for. we accepted the challenge, and a great expense did just that. joe submitted a design that would be acceptable to us and follow the instructions of the commission of october 14

robert denuncio? this is the dr. excuse me. i have been on a conditional use for so long. dr requestors? >> commissioners, thank you for taking the time to meet with us yet again. my name is chris volker. i lived adjacent and to the west of the proposed project. as you know since the last hearing, the sponsor has made a set of revisions unilaterally to their project, which we feel did not address the bulk of the neighbors' concerns, and which nobody is happy with. the neighbors are not satisfied because we think it is still out of scale with the rest of the street. we think it is still out of character with the rest of the street. it does not address our light well concerns. because of the excavation, it adds a steep ramp to the garage that the cars will have to get out of on a narrow and steep street, which we think is a potential detriment to the design. the staff is not happy with the new proposal. they have asked to approve it but let the staff make additional changes. you already see in their earlier briefly recommended that you not take discretionary review because t