is not an acceptable. if the poll was not 18 feet, you would say to resubmit this and get a correct. >> thank you. miss ernst. >> thank you, commissioners. i looked up the report. figure three is just four illustrations of purposes. they try to put information that shows some comparisons, but they do not have to do with this site specifically, and the grass that has the numbers is also done at worst case scenario, so it was showing even if it were lower on the pole, it would be in

compliance, and i want to emphasize we will be doing a test after the installation is complete. i believe this is closer to 45 or 50 feet off the ground. i will make a note to provide it to appellants so they have thought. thank you. >> anything further? >> at this point the department would have nothing to add that would be germane to this hearing. >> if there are no further questions, the matter is submitted. >> i think i understand the point raised by the appellants. i do not think they go to the

question of whether we should grant for repeal or reject the permit, but i appreciate that you raise them today. >> i am in agreement. one could infer from the appellants argument that the department erredç because they did not have correct information. i am not sure her argument rises to that level, and i have nothing in front of me that would allow me to overturn the permit. >> i think i am in agreement

with the rest of the commission. good >> basically, even though the appellant explain that the arguments and would not go towards rating frequencies and whether they are not permissible levels, and we have to decide whether or not it confirms to standards as to whether we allow these facilities to be on the pole, and planning requires it have a certain kind of racket and that it be painted a certain color and conform to that, and this board is not allowed to go into issues that have to do with radio frequencies and whether or not this is harmful to individuals who lives close to

where the antennas are, so to bring an appeal before this body, and i did not mean to be offensive. i was trying to hope that you would spend some of your time with issues we would have to consider or issues but would have us understand the of the lack of data has a bearing on something that was before us. it may be my confusion, but i think i agree with what has been stated here, but this is a proper permit that has fulfilled the requirements of the two regions of -- requirements of dpw and the planning department.

i move that we uphold the permit. >> is out on the basis that it is a code compliant? thank you. if you could call the roll please. >> the motion is from the president to deny this appeal, on the basis that it is code compliant. [calling votes] the vote is 4-0. this permit is of help. -- is upheld. >> item 7 has been postponed. item eight has been withdrawn, so we will move to item 9, lydia lukian vs. zoya lukian,

a permit to alter a building and install new doors at existing locations. we will start with the appellants or their representatives. you have seven minutes. >> my name is wayne canterbury, and i represent libydia and zoy, who are residents since 1969. that is for a row on baker street, and i submit it exhibit thb to illustrate the row of

houses forms achieve -- net the row of houses. there are spaces between the bedroom facing the south to the opposing wall of the neighbor. in this case the neighbor is ruth carlsoton, a woman who livs at 10 05 baker street. she has applied for a permit to remodel her kitchen and construct an extensive system and wrapping around the rear of her home. this is the first invasion of that kind of space in the row of houses that was designed in an

ingenious way to preserve white and security and privacy. we have met with ms. carlsoton prior to the appeal. she was very accommodating on a number of things. one was to pay for the installation design and purchase of a railing for a bedroom window looking at the premises, and we believe she had agreed not to the concept of screening the railing so passers-by would not be able to look inside the

bedroom window. there is a third issue i alerted our architect to, and it has some historical significance. there was some petroleum in an area were opposed was intended to be erected who supports the death. i think that is something we could work out, -- to support the deck. i think that is something we could work out. we thought we had an agreement with miss carlton, but she was preoccupied with business. she was traveling. the time came to waive their rights, so she filed this appeal. we hope we will find we have an

agreement, but if not, while we have no opposition to the kitchen remodeling, we would ask that any approval of the extensive subject system deconditioned on three points. one is that the agreements to pay for the purchase and installation of the window guard, a typical wrought iron railing that would be placed on the property to give security, but she's also her promise to do that. we have apprise died at less than $1,000. we have asked that the screening beam and -- we have apprise it at less than $1,000. we suggest that it does not look to imposing. i would hope it would not

detract from the otherwise elegant design, and finally we ask that measures be undertaken by the applicant to ensure that water intrusion is not increased as a risk by reason of the post and other elements of construction of the proposed debt, and that is my presentation. i would be have been to entertain any questions. >> just for clarification on the third point, you want the water intrusion concern addressed? >> right, they are digging all whole from where the plane took place. >> can you be more specific about how you would like to see that? >> i cannot, because i am not an engineer, but my guess is he will have a number of ideas to address that problem.

all we are asking is that if the address and the design element added to ensure it does not present an additional problems. >> thank you. >> the pictures you show, how wide is the breezeway. >> i do not know the actual with. i am guessing it is 15 feet. i can tell you the decking is built according to the current lance -- current plans, it would be an arm's reach, and it is my understanding that anyone walking on the debt would have a direct you right into the bedroom window of the property. >> what are these windows

democrats that is for the kitchen. it will be remodeled and opened up en. the entrance to the breezeway deck, that is the way she would reach the back deck, other than through her bedroom. in the near genius of this designç, originally were this s built in the late 1940's, is that when you stand at the bedroom window and looks straight out, you are looking at a blank wall, which means nobody can look through that window from the other side. >> could you see through the kitchen window? >> it is my understanding that the bottom of that -- this would

be who they did in the plants. it is my understanding is the carlton bathroom, but the bottom is at a high level. the counterpart corresponding window, built at the same time, is a bathroom window that is protected both ways by frosted glass. grosvenor -- frosted glass. even if you are declines to try to look through it, you would have to stand on your tiptoes and look down, so we do not regard that as a threat. we do not believe people will be assembling in the bathroom. >> is that the only window to

that bedroom? >> that is the only one much further to the right, further to the rear of the house. i believe there is another window, but that is really irrelevant. it would not give any perspective on the privacy of the window. >> are there other windows in that bedroom and? >> i do not think so. >> your assumptions are based on the fact that they are not friendly. part of your assumptions are based on the fact that ms. carlton is not friendly with members of the warriors. >> basketball players? >> yes.

we can hear from the permit holders. >> it is getting late. >> my name is stuart hills. i am the project architect. i have a couple of the exhibits. i will hand you copies in case you want to look at them up close. >> the board has to decide to accept them. >> they are going to be on the overhead. >> you need to provide a copy to the appellant as well. >> i already did. >> president garcia, and new board members, who my client met with the neighbors to go after the -- to go over the plan. they discuss security bars. my client agreed to install the

bars as a courtesy. they did not discuss the privacy screen, but they did address concerns about noise. the window in question is similar to the photographs at have been the appellants' documents. you can see the kitchen window, and you will also notice the war years window. -- the warriors window. it can afford of you down into the project area. the window in question is an existing non-conformity property line window that dates back to the original construction. the space he refers to as security and light space is the side yard, and so kudos for

using the word invasion. half of what we are proposing is indicated on the ground level, approximately 6 feet lower than proposed. >> can you go back to the one window? >> this is the current kitchen window. >> of the permit holder. >> i have a direct view of the bedroom. that is not the only bedroom window in question. there are also two windows that face the real property. >> that is operable or not? >> i believe it is operable, but you have a window replacements. the current configuration, the

access through the yard is the same it would be in the exact same location. the exact same location. it is 3 feet away from the property line, approximately 6 feet higher, so people are going to be walking through their eyes they do now. -- as they do now. regarding the window itself, i have not seen the shade " and, we did the shade open. it is not of private window now. -- i have not seen the shade open. it is not a private window. the idea that we are changing it is simply not the case. the issue of privacy screen has been brought up, but as we

said, and if i am standing directly right now, i can see mr. garcia, but if i turn this way i can see mrs. holstein. it is not going to restrict the view from the bathroom in question. it is not going to restrict the view from the kitchen window. we are willing to talk about good neighbor policies, but planning can address whether this would trigger notification. in has been our position from the beginning that we are willing to address reasonable concerns if we feel that our changes would materially and address those concerns. the security issue we have no problem with. we feel that addresses the concern about security. a privacy screen we do not feel would address thought, and it would simply be right in the

corridor of the brees way, so i remain available for any questions or clarifications. >> issue #3, would you address that? unless we are approving the drainage work currently there is a small drain near the area in question. and we are working to improve the drainage, because otherwise it would overflow into my clients garage. >> i do not understand the impact on the corridor of the increase when a -- of the breezeway. the privacy screening on the deck, that is where it would be placed, and how would that impact -- why would anyone standing on the debck have any interest in looking in the bedroom of the neighbor? >> it is not a gathering place.

the new proposed debck is access to the rear yard. it is introducing my client can introduce plant material. it is not a gathering place. >> but you are walking right by. >> you are very close to it. >> it is not a space that is untouchable. you could look right in if you happen to be curious. >> but i can also see her right here if there was a scream. >> you can address the screen on both anklegles. i may be misunderstanding your drawing, but it appears there will be a rail here, so the screen can be here and hear? >> the appellant have asked for the screen here. ç>> not on this level either?

>> no. >> i understand now. >> what is the distance between the end of the proposed new debt to the property line? >> this area here? that is a little over 3 feet, 3 feet 1 inch. the >> and the other -- any other comments? >> how you access the rear yard? >> currently this is the only access to the rear yard.

in the proposal, this will be access to the rear yard. there will be accessed off the bedroom to reopen. >> there is not living space? >> ok, and a departmental comments? >> good evening, commissioners. i am available for questions. i think it was answered correctly. fear is one answer, if you are going to agree, it would have to

be opened as from the inside. it would have to be open from the side. there would have to be a requirement. any questions? >> good evening. we are very glad to see you. this is a single-family house district. it is not in a detached district. why that is significant is there are no required side yards in the zoning district. nonthe proposed debt does not

occupy space in the rear yard. -- the proposed deck does not occupy a space in the rear yard. it does appear is one of several windows for the bedroom in question. a there is also a situation where privacy may also be afforded. we respectfully ask that you uphold the property-issued a permit. >> following up on the last comment, we have heard from the appellant it is unusual to put a

dent in the space that is otherwise sacred the regular -- sacred. park>> my proposal stems from te idea that this is not at all unusual. >> do you know with respect to the arguments with these particular properties it would be an aberration to have a debt in that place? >> we can put an overhead of. would that be helpful? >> that would be pure your -- that would be.

>> my apologies. it does appear in is not as enlightening as i was hoping it would be which respect to whether or not sex would be constructed nearby -- >> that's ok. >> just one question on the window, it is my understanding that they are not supposed to be operable. was it built at a time where you could? is that why is nonconforming?

>> i defer to the inspector on that. >> we do see a lot of those on san francisco buildings, we certainly see a lot of that on nonconforming property line windows. if you put one in today, it would have to be fixed with a steel frame. >> what if somebody wanted to come in and fix it? would you allow that? >> i am talking about egress. it would have to be a non- comparable window with the steel frame. you have to