And have not had a chance to review any of the revisions as suggested by the planning departme department. As the association stated in its january 30 letter, theres been discrepancies in the plans, numerous revisions, as they relate to the story poles, which the project sponsor erected, which were not accurate, during the period of neighborhood notification, 311 period. The project sponsor represented that the story poles were accurate. We had an onsite meeting, story poles were not accurate. We could not evaluate the plans at the time after the 30daytime, story poles were rearranged and we didnt get the benefit of the 30day notification period, which we would like to be reinstated so we can get a clear picture of what the project sponsor has in mind. We think that the project sponsor is making efforts to understand our concerns, especially as they relate to light, air, ventilation of four bedrooms and four separate units, two units which only have one window that would be encapsulate
Requestors house is finished with proper siding. Is there specific direction from the commission on the top floor . If there is, we would like to hear that. I concur with commissioner richards, that to me the size equity is an issue. Six bedrooms with a ladder in the back reads more like Group Housing than twounit in an rh2 residential district. So i give than ground floor rec room and six units in the top, i would say that you can design a twounit building, you know, in that space without having the fourth floor. So if we think that the project sponsor needs more time, might i suggest either march 8 or 15 . I would go even further. 22nd maybe. March 22, if thats ameanable to the motionmaker . Yes. And seconder . Yes. So on the motion to continue this matter to march 22 [roll call] excellent. That matter has been continued to march 22. Well move on to item number 17. 2016014684drp at 26222624 greenwich street, request for discretionary review. Good evening, commissioners. Dav david lin
Discrepancies in the plans, numerous revisions, as they relate to the story poles, which the project sponsor erected, which were not accurate, during the period of neighborhood notification, 311 period. The project sponsor represented that the story poles were accurate. We had an onsite meeting, story poles were not accurate. We could not evaluate the plans at the time after the 30daytime, story poles were rearranged and we didnt get the benefit of the 30day notification period, which we would like to be reinstated so we can get a clear picture of what the project sponsor has in mind. We think that the project sponsor is making efforts to understand our concerns, especially as they relate to light, air, ventilation of four bedrooms and four separate units, two units which only have one window that would be encapsulated in a light well, which is of great concern to us. We need time. We need time to meet at the project site and we need time to get a clear picture of the intended scope an
The project sponsor erected, which were not accurate, during the period of neighborhood notification, 311 period. The project sponsor represented that the story poles were accurate. We had an onsite meeting, story poles were not accurate. We could not evaluate the plans at the time after the 30daytime, story poles were rearranged and we didnt get the benefit of the 30day notification period, which we would like to be reinstated so we can get a clear picture of what the project sponsor has in mind. We think that the project sponsor is making efforts to understand our concerns, especially as they relate to light, air, ventilation of four bedrooms and four separate units, two units which only have one window that would be encapsulated in a light well, which is of great concern to us. We need time. We need time to meet at the project site and we need time to get a clear picture of the intended scope and revisions. Its been a moving target. Theres been three, four revisions of plans weve ne