even though he has mentioned he is concerned about an earthquake, how he would get out. that is not my problem. the problem needs to be resolved in his own unit. there is no legal requirement to provide light and window. there is no authority about the contemplated work. this obtains a proper permit, and we came to an agreement. i even agree at that time that i would pay for half of the removal of the window as a good neighbor. the window above we stopped complaining about because it was much further above and not right into my bedroom. i do not think i am being unreasonable. i have a small house, much

smaller than hers. my backyard is about three or four times the size of my house and slopes upward, and i walked out, and this is what i see, this window. it is an ugly thing to see. that is all i have to say, in a really appreciate your listening to me, -- and i really appreciate your listening to me, and i do not think any the derogatory comments should affect your decision, because they are simply not true. thank you. commissioner garcia: he is representing you? and you would not be opposed to what he is suggesting? >> i would like to not have a window there, not so close to my bedroom into my backyard door. commissioner garcia: but if it

were opaque, would you still be opposed to it could >> yes, i think i am still opposed to it -- would you still be opposed to it? >> yes, i think i am still opposed to it. president peterson: is there any other further comment? if you want to speak, please step forward. go ahead. >> i was born in yugoslavia, montenegro. the french army. italy.

1960. 1966. u.s. army 1967. i pay taxes. i have never been in jail in my life. they know who i am. i move from yugoslavia in 1969. i served in the army as a sergeant. -- i moved from yugoslavia. i have never read a book or seen a movie like this. [in distinguishable --

unintelligible] ok? president peterson: thank you. is there any other comment? seeing none, we will move into the were bottle. mr. hasson, you have three minutes of rebuttal if you want to use it. >> we would like to have a window in our bedroom like everybody else on the planet. >> i want to let you know that i

agree with some of what that person is saying. ms. gould had explored various options it, and one of those options was two definitely sealed up a window and create another window in another part of that room in that area. mr. hasson had obviously strenuously objected to having the windows sealed up, and, frankly, i understand why. it has been mrs. gould's intention all of this time to maintain a window in this space, so with all due respect, at some point, he might have understood that mrs. gould had attempted or contemplated ceiling that space up, -- sealing that space up,

but she has always wanted to maintain a window in that room for obvious reasons. the property value will be affected if that window is sealed up. there was another consideration. mr. hasson is a tenant of hers. he has a right, whether it is mandated or not, to be able to have a place that at least has some light in his room. there is no necessary law, but i would say that mrs. gould, if that will go issealed -- is sealed up that mr. hasson brings this up at the rent board about it being sealed up. when i spoke with tony at dbi,

the discussion about fire always contemplated some sort of window which would allow her to abate the nov, so when mr. garcia brought up this issue of a fire -- window, if you will, that was a part of that discussion -- brought up this issue of a fire- rated window. the discussion was the same. it was always discussed in the context of leading a window there. it was not to seal the window up. so i take exception to that particular comment, and that is her intent. and basically solve all problems. it abates the nov, and it is not the cheapest way to abate the nov. the cheapest way for her to abate the nov is to seal it

up, so we want to be able to keep a window there and satisfy mr. hasson and set asidet -- and satisfied -- satisfy the nov. president peterson: thank you. any further comment? seeing none, the matter is submitted. commissioner fung: i have a question. the window there is fairly small. a habitable room requires a certain percentage of the curtainwall have a window. it also requires a certain opera ability -- operability for it.

as we mentioned, it is relatively small. a fixed window here, whether it is one-hour waiting or not, it does not satisfy the have the ability -- ability to have to take it. >> you cannot exit from the bedroom across the property line. the jason neighbor can build a building on the property line,

and the code does not allow for the exits. commissioner garcia -- the adjacent neighbor. commissioner garcia: not habitable for code. >> it allows for artificial light. commissioner garcia -- commissioner fung: and the exit? >> there were lesser regulations

on the windows. i am not sure when that building was actually constructed. commissioner fung: with this building and not be grandfathered prove commissioner -- and not be grandfathered. commissioner hwang: something you said struck me. if the code is not enforced retroactively, why is the goul d's property affected?

>> any legal window. it was not installed with a permit. and the widow seems to be an aluminum window. those windows where probably available in the 1960's or sometime about then, so i do not know if that window was ever -- on the property line, especially because it opens. and, furthermore, the permit was filed with the notice of violation. commissioner hwang: i understand about that, but i am just wondering about the grandfathering. >> i do not know how grandfathering would apply. commissioner hwang: i think you just said that it was legal.

>> is that the same? that is much better.

>> [inaudible] course of rather have that than a blank wall. >> did you have a motion? >> yes, i'm trying to figure out what i was speaking. as i read this applications, it indicates that the windows being removed and the walls filled thandinin, the only way to be ss

the option. this is either the option for me or a window assembly with opaque glass. >> i cannot understand why we don't leave this as it is.

>> this can be appealed. >> this will be dragged to a director's meeting. >> the permit holder could actually withdraw this. it sounds to meet that the permit holder doesn't even like the permit. >> we can understand the scope of this permit. >> the permit holder could withdraw the permit and pull a different one. >> this has to do with the framing over the property?

>> i think that this has to do with the fact that to the window is there. this is the only window that is different from anything else we can see in the pictures. the trim looks like it is rotten. this extends over the property line. >> any kind of fixed window that could not be opened and we have the encroachment on the property line, would that be satisfactory? >> yes.

this says to legalize the windows.

>> any content that you plan on it -- tint that you put on it is to prevent people from looking in. >> this has to be fixed.

this is too complicated to make it comparable. i will make a motion and to a certain degree i would rely upon what was stated by the council. i move that the appeal be denied. i have to except the appeal and modified on the condition that the permit is modified and a one

hour fix window assembly was opaque and this was the class that would be installed. >> the assembly was translucent. >> or opaque glass. >> i think if we add some language to comply with this, that what kind of wrapped everything up. >> this would have to be to protect their future rights. you can add the language for it to be opaque or gas.

>> are you ready to call the role? >> to restate the motion to grant the appeal but the permit is upheld, the scope is modified to include a one hour not operable with the with translucent or opaque glass.

>> we are setting their appeal that the permit be revised and that the new assembling conforms to the administrative bulletin with a translucent or opaque fire-rated class. >> isn't this transparent?

>> with glass that you cannot see through. >> that is pretty scientific. >> do you want to respond to my motion? >> i'm wondering why a -- is consulted on the motion when he is representing. >> they are existing translucent and based on his knees for his client. >> as many people have indicated, we are not perfect. >> need your mind. i find this somewhat

inappropriate. >> we're back to the old. >> we're back to class you cannot see through. >> the motion, before it gets voted on, we have to hear from -- >> i am being in tune to. >> we are only expecting comments on the motion, nothing having to do with the merits of this case any longer. thank you. >>