meeting, and at the last minute, they declined to meet. that is where it has gone wrong. i guess it is for you guys decide about the setback, and the last couple weeks, nothing has been testy, but it has been a good dinner throughout. there is this notion of an alternative to belittle that over the first floor on the back of the house. i guess they have decided to go ahead with this one. these are all good people, and we appreciate you helping solve this for us. >> any other public comment? we will move into rebuttal. you have three minutes of rebuttal.

>> again, right from the beginning, i am not really properly notified and the permit process. that is why i was not involved. since i got the letter, i did talk to them and we tried to set up some meetings, hopefully we could come up with some compromise. she mentioned about a three-foot setback and again, i prefer to meet in person and sit down and agree. i never agreed on a three-foot setback with her. hopefully you can see that as a property owner on this side, without any setback, a building along the fence will be pretty obstructive to our side.

>> could you live there? hong >> i used to. >> how long have you not lived in your house? >> 1987. >> of the room with the window in question, it is a kitchen? >> yes. it is a lower unit. >> what is above that room? what is the floor above it? at the kitchen of the upper unit? >> be no what is the room above that? -- do you know what is the room above it? >> the living room. >> was any consideration given to -- or was there talk about bringing light into the kitchen?

>> in has plenty of light, but we need a natural light. certainly we don't want to block the sunlight. >> thank you. >> may i say something? to be consistent, i have never seen any extension of the was only one set back. i have seen people extend out and always both sides in setback. obviously, to me, it is not really consistent with how of the extension of the building is all about. particularly, it should be both sides. i am not an architect or in planning, but that is the number one thing i see.

how can that get approved? >> three minutes of rebuttal for the permit holders. >> i am the architect. i always tell my clients that the first thing to do is talk to adjacent neighbors. i want to reiterate, i do quite a bit of this work in the city. i have lived here since 1976. i wanted to clarify their was an issue. on the north side, we had the five-foot setback. there were quite a number of windows and there to allow light into his property. maybe it is not clear, but we have an eight-foot setback on the north side because we have the three-foot deck as well.

when looking at the window, that spare covers that window. i am sure that window -- he can probably answer this better than i can, it is a required a second means of egress. i assume that is why it is there. if it is built illegally, it should have had a one-hour firelock. if it is a three-unit building, it would require a five-foot setback. in either case, it doesn't meet either of those categories. i am told that the owner of the property did rebuild the stairs and he did it initially without a permit, later came back and had to get it cleared up. on top of that, it should really be closed in by the modern codes. thank you. >> anything further from the

department? >> first, with regards to notice, the section 311 notification is for owners and documents. the mailing would have gone to the occupants of the building as well as the owner of the assessor's records. and there is an address on the avenue, in regards to the extensions. it is typical to build when the code does allow the. setbacks are lout with the controlled lockouts on the back. you see either a one-story full addition or a two-story addition setback at the rear. and the residential design guidelines, even the full width may be allowed. you might be able to preserve light and air to windows. we believe that given the stairs

that are already there in place in the development that has already occurred, and given the nature of the window, in this case, it will be appropriate to allow the addition of proposals for available questions. commissioner fung: i was a little confused by that. with respect to the pop out beyond the 45% rear yard, you are saying that it does not require a setback on each side of the two stories? >> when it is two-stories, it requires a five-foot setback on each side. when it is one story, it will be the full width. you can note that on the plans, the bulk of the addition home is

within the buildable area and is not a permitted obstruction. that allows them to go to the south side property line. there is a portion, 2 feet or so that you see a set back 5 feet from the property line. the portion is part of the pop out, so that is why it is set back on each side. it can be a bit confusing. the bulk of the addition is within the primary buildable enveloping given using the averaging of the appellants property and the other property to the north. >> that staircase has the appearance to be a second means of egress? >> i would defer to mr. dufty. >> assuming it is, it seems to

would consider not bringing it all the way up to the property line in order to allow light into the window. >> in terms of it being a second means of egress -- >> there is a good reason to have a staircase there. if there is a wall, the window really won't receive any natural light. >> i believe the building is required to get all of its own natural light in there from its own property and not from adjacent properties. i understand your point about setting it back. it is a discretionary call. your opinion, as is any other, it is a question of opinion and if the board chooses to do a setback, i think hollywood understand that.

-- i think we would understand that. >> good evening, commissioners. i know you have concerns about the staircase. the photographs show that stairway going right up the property line. i don't know when the stairway was built, but if you were building it with a permit today, it would have to have a fire wall. [unintelligible] it would block like any way through the windows. but we do see this condition all over the city with these older buildings, so it is hard to tell when it was built. i think the word conforming is probably --

>> does it appear to be a second means of egress to you? >> it does. i certainly don't know enough about the building to say that it is, but it certainly looks like that from the photographs. commissioner garcia: it would block the light from the west, but what this project will do is now also block light from the south? from the north. >> somewhat, that is right. >> commissioners, the matter is submitted. president goh: comments?

>> your time is expired. commissioner garcia: we don't have a lot else going on tonight. commissioner fung: perhaps it will lean toward a solution. two issues about the appellant, their property, it appears that the extensive entitlement that allowed on the property was done before they bought it. therefore, that extension was probably done whether it had been reconstructed and got is a different issue and it doesn't have as much pertinent to my decision tonight.

the question of the view from the kitchen window unfortunately goes across as someone else's property line. that is not necessarily protected. i do know that the appellants property as compared to the other properties have three sides of their building providing light and a view. and it is significantly greater than those bounded by zero property lines. i am supportive of the idea that going to the property line on the south side makes the entire situation of the -- not only the larger building on the corner, but also creates a less than desirable situation for

both neighbors. i would be supportive of the proposal that was made aware they may set back the top floor 3 feet. i know that side has a closet. therefore, the site being set back -- it is similar to what the permit holder had offered in their compromise. and i think it is a better solution for both parties. >> if the parties are comfortable compromising to that extent, i would be obviously happy that this would not be a decision that we need to make, but i am also inclined to uphold the permit as it is.

>> if you don't mind, i will speak next. it does seem that the appellants, there might have been some confusion and misunderstanding and that they missed an opportunity to work on some kind of compromise or some kind of setback. we need these second means of egress in these old buildings. they are challenging. it because there is one mayor, it is blocking that window. and to allow this edition to enclose it completely into a little cave doesn't seem like it would comply with residential design guidelines. for that reason, i would support the setting back.

>> one commissioner wants to uphold the permit and somebody wants a setback from the current plans, and the third commissioner wants an alternative. is that a proper summary? >> the same set back. there are two further setbacks. commissioner garcia: i would support that idea. commissioner fung: which idea? commissioner garcia: the idea of the setback that has been referred to by you and by president goh. >> is there a motion? commissioner garcia: yes, mr. sanchez? >> of the board does request a side setback, how with the

excess -- extent of the setback be? one might be just where the rear building wall of the permit holders property is, going back to the rear from there. commissioner garcia: that would be my assumption. madame director, can we craft something tonight or do we need to have a continuance to have documents to commission the permit. i don't want to create a problem for the permit process, through either revision or something else. >> if we can be specific about the location and dimensions of the setback, we can roll tonight, otherwise we can ask that the permit holder prepare drawings to document what you have in mind.

commissioner garcia: i would be more comfortable to have the parties sit down one more time and decide with coercion from this board, i am not going to support a reduction of the addition of a way down to the ground floor. and i am only talking about realigning the setback on the very top floor. >> are you making a motion for a continuance? commissioner fung: that ais probably better for both parties. commissioner garcia: i am not reprimanding anyone, but one speaker talked about the commonality in the the town had endured and there seemed to be a minimum of conflict. the architect, i am not reprimanding you, it seems that

you said that we deserve what we have because they were so out of conformance with what should be. i hope that when you go into negotiations with your neighbor, that that town be something other than what was demonstrated appear. >> i would recommend we look at january of 11 as a possible date for a continuance. commissioner fung: is that a problem with either party? ok. mr. kwan, is that an issue? what i hope is that you will arrive at a common resolution and there for what ever drawing you come up with, we will condition the permit with that and it will proceed onward and the normal course ha.

-- in the normal course. is january 11 ok? i will move to continue this case to january 11. >> the motion is to continue to january of 11 with the board encouraging the parties to try to meet to come up with a resolution and provide the board with plans reflecting that resolution. >> on that motion to continue. president goh: aye. commissioner garcia: aye. commissioner hwang: aye. >> the vote is 4-0. the matter is continue to january of 11. >> there is no further business

this evening. president goh: we are adjourned.

the biggest issue in america today? segregation still exists... racism... the repression and oppression of women the educational system stem cell research homeless people cloning government health care taxation announcer: so, is there anything you're doing to help make a change? i'm not really doin' anything. ummmm [sighs] got me on that one...

>> when there is this a children's theater, it is a good theater. it is a good theater, you would like it, even if it is for children. that is what i think. i feel like it is both a story for kids and for much older people. it is both about being a young child and letting a toy or a friend, and it is also about what it means to get old. ♪ >> in 1986, my son was two, and i decided i would like to go

over the story of the velveteen rabbit, mind you i had never read it myself as a child. i only heard it as a mother. my first-time hearing it was a bedtime story recording. it was through that that i found the theme and determined how it was going to produce this story. it was through listening to it. when a first mated, i really did watch my son, because i took him to live performances as soon as six months old. he loved it when someone was on the stage. he loved it when somebody was reading to him, the language. >> there was once a velveteen rabbit. >> usually when the bunny first comes out ago, ah, the rabbit. i think kids can relate to it.

and they built love nana. nana is the man at all figure in the show, and she represents stern love. the ferry is also played by the same person. -- the fairy is played by the same person. it is like the love you have for your first child. pure love. >> i think nature is a beautiful thing. all the wild rabbits come from nature. i like that. i think nature is mysterious, a beautiful, and not something our kids get very much these days. ♪ >> there is fantastical spectacle these days because of computers and films. i feel that in a live

performance, being pared down, you can be more successful you can ask everybody to buy into the world you're in. if it is a simple world, they will buy into it, as long as the world is consistent that you have onstage. in some ways, i also want that message for kids. the world does not have to be spectacle. the world can be about relationships, how you feel, and having fun and taking them seriously. and not about being blown away. >> what is real, asked the rabbit one day. >> it is a thing that happens to you when a child loves you for a long, long time. >> i think it is a success because, for the most part, if you are 3 or 7 years old, you sit in the sea, and the kids are engaged. they laugh and ask questions but

that is part of the success. i think the fact that we tour and do it here and still have audiences says it is a lasting. i really want to say that it is lasting is because of the story is a gentle story. if it was just ok, it would not have lasted this long. i have had people come up to me and say that was the first dance show i ever saw and that is why i am a choreographer today. i have had people come back after being in the shows and come back to see it when they're 20 and 23 years old. little kids and people in their 50s and 60s tell me how much they love it. and they come back more than once, year after year. ♪

>> i should not be on stage. when you should be seeing -- i am used to the stage but not. that is who should be on stage. i am an animator. i am with picks are animation studios. in some ways, i felt comfortable being on stayed behind my computer. it is weird for me to be on the microphone. i have a lot of work to do but i am here to explain that, i'll come to that later. i wanted knowledge some of our special guests this morning. first off, i have some flashcards.