but it looks as though the addition is just a little bit beyond the length of the house of the d.r. requester. >> that's correct, yeah. commissioner antonini: so basically how many square feet it is is not material to me, because what we're trying to look at is the impact it has on the d.r. requester's light and air, whether it's 1,500 square feet or 3,000 or 4,000 square feet. if there's no impact, it really isn't material as to the size of the addition. as long as it's appropriate design-wise and appropriate as far as the residential design guides. >> the residential design time are not particularly counting square footage as much as they're looking at building ability and a lot of it is up to the expertise of the building or design architect to be able to efficiently design square footage that still respects the overall scale and integrity of a block that -- for the building form that's established on the block. commissioner antonini: thank you. i would compliment mr. mcgannon on his backyard, it's beautifully done. you really used that space very well. it's very gratifying to see when peo

later on we yielded some 10 accommodations to please the d.r. requester. i found it really disappointing that it served no purpose in the end, but we still kept all those accommodations out of consideration. my client, devin, is not wealthy. he's doing such remodel for the very first time and we're working with a tight budget still, because he is socially responsible. we are pursuing certification and have incurred expenses just to be socially responsible. we're very proud of the design of the house. we put enormous effort in thinking it through. we incorporated all sorts of socially responsible features like adding greenery, making it extremely energy efficient. we think it's going to look nice inside and out and it will be a great house to live in. we hope for your support. thank you so much. president fong: thank you. any other speakers in support of the project sponsor? ok. d.r. requester, you have a two-minute rebuttal. >> this project takes a house that's debatable whether it's 810 or 900 square feet and not doubles it, but more than tripp els it, alm

request for their new office low cailted at 4334 gerry boulevard, san francisco. thank you very much. >> are there any other speakers in favor of the project? >> ok. d.r. requester, you have a two-minute rebutal. >> thank you, president fong. steve williams again. don't pick the need of these tetants against the continued viblingt against providing dental care to children. that's a false dichotomy and you know it. that's not the choice that you're facing here. there's nothing to legally compel that used to be in this new office building anywhere. it's a shame we didn't get the offer earlier. it's a shame that we wouldn't agree to continue it so we could work out the details of that. we wanted to work out a solution. they referenced the agreement and how generous they're being and all the changes they're making, et, etc. etc. but look at the changes. light wells three by three. there that's nowhere. look at the light wells they don't even match the light wells. nothing close to a written agreement that they reached. they handed something to us today and to the commissioners today that came a little bit closer to what they agreed to in writing a year ahea

. >> i will call upon the d.r. requester to report back on whether there was an agreement or not. >> unfortunately, the devil is in the town. i have us and to agree to a continuance so we can hammer out an agreement, because there are a lot of variables floating around, and they are not amenable to that. >> no agreement. gooif we are going to follow the process, the d.r. requester has had a chance to speak. we should now have died. >> i do have cards there. goo[list of names] >> hello, commissioners. thank you for listening to me. i believe i stand in front of you as a property manager representing the owners who are people who really care about his property. >> can you state your name for the record? >> eva. and the impact it will have on our tenants, regardless of the low rent they are paying. we have a 71-year-old who has been here, and he wants to be here, but he cannot. she is only paying $212, and she has been here 20 years. another one who has been here more than 45 years, this is their quality of life we are talking

fines from the meetings attended that the project sponsor has been more than accommodating to the d.r. requesterby reducing the building height by reducing the fourth floor, installing matching light wells, august 12th, 2011 meeting. extending the original structure and as requested by the planning department. in addition park fines of the proposed project would be a welcome and long overdue addition. the services the project sponsor would provide our neighborhood is unique and beneficial to our residents. we are pleased that the project sponsors and that the owner to the smile for life foundation recognized by the california legislature assembly. i ask that you approve this project with no further modifications or delays. thank you for your consideration thank you board member representative, land use committee. sheryl schultz. thank you. >> hi, good evening. i'm here to speak on behalf of joseph franks who is a 15-year-old foster youth who was awarded a smile for lifetime scholarship. i can attest to what kayla had said previously which is that the beneficial nature of the scholarship is somet

building and go south to incorporate the property line window on the second floor. >> we have the d.r. request for support of that. >> that some requests -- that is correct. this is 5 feet or 6 feet deep. this drying shows 3 feet. >> the northern light well and a larger southern light well, 6 feet, i believe. >> would you be willing to do those one in 3 feet. >> we are willing to do whatever the commission would propose. it would be of great benefit to these units. these would be rendered uninhabitable by the construction ida the definition of the building code. >> i agree, these issues should be resolved before they ever get here. you should be discussing this. you have put us in an awkward position. >> the project sponsor put you in that position. >> that is 5 feet forward. >> we are ready to sit down. >> i agree with that and it is important to get the light in there. on the issue of parking, you should take the bus to the dentist. a lot of people take the bus to the dentist. the buses are crowded, there are expressed and local buses. they are available. the commissioner suggested that the

. >> i will call upon the d.r. requester to report back on whether there was an agreement or not. >> unfortunately, the devil is in the town. i have us and to agree to a continuance so we can hammer out an agreement, because there are a lot of variables floating around, and they are not amenable to that.

. >> i will call upon the d.r. requester to report back on whether there was an agreement or not.

the d.r. requester's packet included this photograph of 4330 gerry.we're proposing not exactly what we submitted in writing as an agreement but we're proposing a light well of about 30 feet that would go from three feet wide to three feet nine in the front portion of the building adjacent to our stairwell. we can't go wider than that. we propose to move these two windows, these two property line windows forward and move this one back. so they're within the light well-. these windows as i'll show you in other pictures show rooms that already have windows. so we're going to be adding a window on a light well-to rooms that don't currently have any western light only from the light well-itself. so i'm quickly would like to show you other pictures if we can go to the computer overhead please. i have letters of support from the property owners to the rear on 7th and on 8th. i think that the idea that there is a mid block open space here is kind of problematic. the existing building is 17 feet high at the rear and it makes an l-shape building right now what

the planning commission should not take discretionary review. this concludes my presentation. president fong: thank you. d.r. request, sir? you have five minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my wife and my two daughters moved into 26th street approximately five years ago. i grew up and lived on the west side, but after getting married my wife loved the sun and couldn't handle the fog, so we decided to move east. when i first heard about noise valley i said no way, the gardens are too small, we have children, the places are too expensive. it doesn't work. the agent told me take a look at it. i went and looked at it and we fell in love with the house. we fell in love with the backyard. i've got photos there and i have some more photos here if you'd like to see them of my garden, the adjacent gardens. everybody really prides themselves on the open space and values. it's a sunny part of the city and we value that. my house was in the sunset and i was on the foggy side or my house was -- i'm sorry, i'm speaking a little fast because i'm a little nervous. but if my house was at a different orientation or if i lived in the