these items. i am not sure if i can address all of them. [inaudible] i can try to explain. what he is talking about is that years ago, a gentleman filed some sort of judgment, when that judgment, that the property line is 6 inches over from our wall. i do not know how to go about addressing that. that is not legally, i do not know if it is within our means. i know much of the other items, i have not been able to read through. they re similar to some of this. the windows looking into adjoining properties, the east elevation, that is all of our windows that were pre-existing. that is not possible. that requires all of those windows to be closed. people have no light and air. on the west side, there are no windows. again, the list, i can go on and on. our plans have addressed all the other issues. we really have to move on. thank you. the public hearing is closed. commissioners? commissioner moore: i am basically confused. when the applicant first started, it seems like th
the 6 inch encroachment, they have built a house 6 inches away from their property line. that is not realistic, it is a separate issue, i understand. that is something that she said she would look into. other than that, i think everything else is fair and reasonable. we hope that you take you incorporate the special conditions. thank you. project sponsor, you have two minutes. i just read through some of these items. i am not sure if i can address all of them. [inaudible] i can try to explain. what he is talking about is that years ago, a gentleman filed some sort of judgment, when that judgment, that the property line is 6 inches over from our wall. i do not know how to go about addressing that. that is not legally, i do not know if it is within our means. i know much of the other items, i have not been able to read through. they re similar to some of this. the windows looking into adjoining properties, the east elevation, that is all of our windows that were pre-e
look directly into a bedroom. it was just a question of privacy. they have agreed to do that. the had also agreed to do the opaque one window that looks into the living room of mr. wulfe s property. i understand if you are not able to do that legally. but that was something we have agreed. it was two windows. the third window, item number one, the have also agreed to do that. it does not bother me for the privacy of their tenants, if they want us looking into their property. that is their prerogative. we can do that. i do not have a problem with it. my big concern was that it was finally the window. every time somebody walked by, our dogs would go crazy. that is the rest, i think. i think everything else is ok. commissioner antonini: i have a question for staff about item three, which mr. marquez was referring to. is it true that there is a requirement to remove this partially constructed deck, or not? from my understanding, the deck was made illegally. i guess when i was
with this. is there an architect? not present. bad mistake. ver bad very bad mistake. your other mistake was buying a property that had a lien on it you did not know about. either you did not look at your papers, or you have an incompetent real-estate agent. third bad mistake was not dealing constantly with your neighbors, who you knew. this does not work, as far as i am concerned. it does not work at all. if you want a commission to deal with something, the purchase the property was non-conforming, that had work done without a permit, and you expected to go ahead without any actual people to work with you or testified to this commission that our experts in the field. i cannot deal with this. it should not be in front of us in the first place. commissioner sugaya: i would agree to the comments from the commissioners before me. on the other san on the other hand, there are certain conditions i cannot except either. opaque windows are not going to make it with me. forcing t