item to public comment will continue the public hearing is not closed it will continue the 20th >> icing for closing that item i'll reopen this hearing so it continues until the 20th of may and if why not take a motion to resend closing the hearing. supervisor kim and supervisor campos the hearing has been rescinded and with that we will take supervisor kim's motion to continue those items until the 20th of may keeping the hearing open we'll take that without objection. that's the case now our final 3:00 p.m. special order items 25 through 28 >> are the public hearing of perm or persons who are interested in the public hearings approving a approving a

tenant parcel matter and next is the approving the tentative project map and item 27 is disapproving the parcel map and item 28 is the direction of the appropriation of understanding. >> colleagues, we have an appeal for the tentative map for those hearing we'll consider whether is map is consistent with the general plans that apply as far as our process we've first hear from the tenant and tank public comments then hear from representatives of dpw and the planning department that will have up to 10 minutes and following the departmental presentation we'll hear from the

person's speaking open on behalf of the parties in interest and finally the appellant will have 3 minutes up to a rebuttal agreement. supervisor breed in who's district if you have any comments n in not let's open it up to the appellant >> step forward you have up to 10 minutes you can use as much of that as you like. >> i'm jeremy i'm an a in the area i'm appealing this decision on and on on multiply grounds i'll start with the first, i was

not notified in august and it was not proven and filing that i was noticed and furthermore, there have on a number of surveillance that were granted for this subdivision and numerous of those surveillance directly and effect me as ass a contract with the builder the first is in the section of planning code requiring the rear yard to be of a certain size and it would decrease my background and personal space to 3 feet from 17. i would also like to note that the section 135 of the planning

code requires 35 square feet for each dwelling units it will be reduced to 86 square feet. something else the plan will reduce the building size by 6 feet rome part of my dwelling. and thereby breaching the kraekt contract that i have to rent the space. i've been in the space with my partner for i've been there personally with 10 years and my partner 6. the core argument is that the free space the private free space of the backyard which i've made you improvements to

including presidential approximately two hundred and 50 square feet of patio space and one hundred and 50 square feet of viable garden boxes and grilling area and an area for potted herbs and plants. and finally, i'd like to bring the point of surveillance made in section 1589 regarding parking. the back of the unit has a 3 car garage that will be removed and parking in my neighborhood is difficult to say the least. and this will cause greater

problems to parking in the neighborhood. which will go against the cities master plan rather than providing any additional spaces solving the issue of parking in our neighborhood or helping with the issue of parking in our neighborhood. it's might hope i find i'd like to point out that one of the reasons cited to give the answers there's a lot of adjacent to me that's been granted this subdivision in 2008, although they were no improvements made to the backyard of that property and no parking spaces at stake i hope you'll overturn this decision and thank you for your time >> supervisor kim. if you could turn our mike on

>> i'm trying to get a better sense of the background so i saw your handwritten letter our a tenant on fell street and 655 one building. >> yes. it is. >> how many units are in the building currently and what upstairs after the subdivision is approved. >> there are two units in the buckle although the back of the house will lose 6 feet losing square footage. >> what was the motivation and the sentiment of the other tenants. and the other tenants are difficult to talk to for things i won't go so what i informed them of the case but they have issues that keep them from

showing up here today >> and what's the motivation as the property owner in reducing the size of your unit by 6 feet in the rear. >> i'm not sorry. >> your unit will be reduced by 6 feet. >> 6 linear feet. >> did you have a discussion with the landlord. >> they've not contacted me. >> you've never had a discussion the reason you have a handwritten letter that's the day i was traveling to europe i had a half hour i was able to file the appeal before i left for europe and arrived after the 10 day period and hastily wrote the letter i had you don't, no

idea. >> are interest landlord issues outside of that. >> the landlord the current property owner acquired the owner at auction due to 15 foreclosure there are water bill issues that i've paid but this is the only issue so far. but in a sense i've have not been told about the subdivision or told my rent will be changed or even what will be the plan once it's divided >> thank you. >> supervisor cowen. you said you received a letter how did you receive the letter visiting i need to come and have

an appeal >> i received it in the mail not certified from the planning department i assume. i received no information from the owner >> thank you. supervisor breed >> thank you. can i have clarity to our last statement about a new landlord purchased the building how long ago. >> t i believe it was made in july of august of 2012. >> and then just last year they filed for a change in the property with the planning department. >> this is what i see from the planning departments decisions in august that was granted. >> so you've not talked to your landlord at all will be the plans but i've reached out to them. >> i haven't i don't have the

only contract is the secretary i don't know who owns the property aside from the corporation of a e w corporation. >> and you got a notice in the mail informing i have what was happening. >> only in the planning department that's correct. >> thank you. thank you very much any more questions colleagues. thank you very much to the appellant let me ask any members of the public that wishes to speak in support of the appellant >> no? okay seeing none let me turn it over to city staff to the dpw and planning department you'll have up to 3 minutes to describe >> good afternoon bruce city and county surveyor we got this

application in april of 2013 and referred it out to the city agencies got a conditional approval in june of 2013 and the conditional approval from the city planning and issued a senior conditional map approval on april 7th. we had up until we got this notice of appeal we had no idea there was no problem it's a through lot the subdivision proposes basically a lot that will front on hickory street. and demolition of a garage on

hickory streets that's all the information i have if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them >> colleagues, any questions and supervisor wiener. >> this was the first time i've come into an appeal hearing not really knowing what the issues of the appeal are. the appeal itself is one sentence and it only took an half hour to do it ideally you'll submit a supplemental afterwards i couldn't understand the city commissions understanding is it a condo conversion so after hearing all this i don't know what this project is i'll be honest it's a little bit frustrating so maybe you could start from the beginning and is what exactly is being done >> it's a two lot subdivision. >> that i need more detail than

that. >> your gone to end up with the applicant is going to end up with one lot with to buildings. >> they're trying to develop it. >> it's not required for the application. >> so mr. star looks like he wants to say something to the president. >> there the president aaron star planning department staff no place has been proposed but the intent to so build a single-family home on hickory street so the variance was for the existing was important lot size and rear yard and open space. so there's no proposal there's a

pattern on the block where they have been subdividing the lot >> the appellant is stating someone of his rented space see being reduced i don't understand that's maybe a rent board issue or a subdivision issue but so - >> yeah. i think the last 6 feet of the building is proposed to be removed that's ate a small edition but that's done to provide rear yard open space once it's subdivided. >> to no p pa has been filed. >> no, the promotions this size don't get that but no permit for it and no preapplication. >> how do you know that - >> it was part of the operation

for the variance so what someone subdivides something we assume they want to build something so they can only build a single-family home. >> i'm in the same position as commissioner lee the appellant hadn't done many outreach to my office and supervisor breed i don't know if so appellant has reached out to your office we have very little information is mr. chair mr. city attorney what exactly are our options here today, we want to make a decision to uphold the planning department understanding but. >> i don't believe you're up holding the planning department but the department of public works to uphold. john gibner, deputy city attorney you basically have 3

options one is fisherman the map option two is reject the map and if you reject the map then there are certain finding you need to make and categories to justify rejecting the map and the third item is to keep the item open and continue it to a future date you'll might get more information from the appellant or the property owner or other participants. >> if we reject it what kind of findings and there are 7 different reasons for rejecting a map. one of them is the proposed map is inconsistent with the map in the general area the design or the improvement of the designed

subdivision so the proposed development on the vacant lot is inconsistently with the general plan and it's not suitable for the uses that are proposed by the owner. and not physically suitable for the density of the area would likely cause indisputable environmental damage or injury or hurt wildlife >> we don't have enough detail to know if this was try. >> that's how it sounds. >> as a point of order can we make a motion to keep it open or take public comment or - >> you should at this point the appellant still has 10 minutes to speak and public comment in support of the appellant at which point you can decide to continue the item to a date

sure. >> perfect thank you very much. >> supervisor breed. >> mr. gibner clarity as to the ability of a parcel map without a specific project is that appropriate? >> on that question i would defer to the departments on the standard process for - >> but we have in front of us the reason for i mean i described the reasons for recreation of the map i'm confused as to sequa what we reject the map on the basis of when we don't have a project to reject the map because we don't know what is practice writing project is. >> one point of classification it's not sequa that is setting the standard but the map another

state law. so mr. star described the variance application and that's the information you have before you as to the proposed use of the property. if the applicant is present and i don't know if he is that hearing from the applicant may further illuminate what the plan is. okay >> okay. so colleagues, i i'm not warrior aware of besides reaching out to my office i have real concerns there's no project meanwhile attached to the map i'm not certain if he wanted to continue it depends on but i guess we've move on to the hearing and hopefully, some of the questions will be answered.

>> colleagues, any additional questions to city staff either dpw or anyone else. >> at this time why not go to the real party interests you have up to 10 minutes to present. >> i'm geremo i work for r r w properties. mostly i did the filing of the application which includes the variance and they were approved during the planning commission hearing scheduled no october. prior to that when we filed in april of last year they were lists of addresses for and labels to mail within a 3 hundred foot radius and 2011 all

the residents at the nearby the property including mr. hurting log our tenants. we also posted i'd like to show this it's right here we posted the notice prior to the october hearing is there a way to zoom but we posted the notice sorry. we posted the notice on the rear detached garage as well as mr. herself logs window so he was e he was notified about the events that were going to occur you see his unit and it's facing outward our project manager checked to

see mr. why there was something about dethe courses but the rear portion that's the storage and rear area that's not part of his habitable unit we can resolve that if it impacts him but the issue is all the conditions that are listed here - here's the let me show you this. this is the parcel map showing where the line is going through. i don't know if you can see that and other properties in the area facing hickory in the past have been approved with the surveillance from the planning department and the public works mapping. as far as that is concerned he had every tint because we did

invite him with not only the mailings that were received by or sent to him by zoning unless zoning naild failed to mail him the original ones as well what we posted. let me see he mentioned that he has no notice until relevant but he had 80 feet affecting him which leads me to building he knew we sent him a letter and all this was forwarded to the persons who were corresponding with us from your board. and some of these, in fact, we've got right here this is the letter we forwarded to our

departments we told him he could look at the plans and also able to look at the plans in the public works department as well as planning as recently as april 9th when he decided to file the appeal. so in essence as far as the plan for the rear lot we filled the necessary restrictions that the planning commission and the planning department asked us to do. they are recorded and we preceded with the tentative parcel being approved by the folks over in mapping. most recently i believe you received a letter from the planning department indicating that all of the different

conditions were mediating met for the variances and it was granted under the finding i don't know if you've had a chance to read those we weren't aware to contact our district supervisor we thought it was with the clerk in the office we having would have contacted you but every step of the way we've compiled with on this approve for subdividing the lot. our tension if we seat belt lot is for another single-family home on hickory street. currently mr. hurt in so doing mentioned the tenants we have parking spaces that were not part of the agreement.

he mentioned the lot next door that was subdivided in 2008 there are 3 parking spaces there but that's beside the point. as far as that edition that was done sometime in the past it's a non-habitual space that's being used for laundry and did not effect his living area. i don't know if you have questions for me >> colleagues, any questions. to the departing interest. supervisor cowen >> i want to make sure your splitting the lots for two single-family homes. >> we were looking to split the lot to keep the front

duplicating election and eventually someone will sell it it and we recorded those as a deed restriction. >> any further questions colleagues. okay. at this time i'll ask if any members of the public that support accident interest. seeing none, why don't we hear under the appellant supervisor breed a question? okay. back again for 3 minutes from the appellant >> first of all, i'd like to address the notice that was placed in my unit. i did not realize at the time the scope of this project. and it wasn't upon visitation from the planning board i found out that portion of my unit will be reduced it's not true it's not part of my unit.

i have direct access from my bathroom and i pay for the laundry and storage and use it on a regular basis. furthermore it's true i don't have access to the parking but i refer to the planning code section 159 where is veterinarians have been sought and removes parking issues for myself and everyone in our community for the if i blocks. also again, it maybe an issue for the rent board but i'd like to stress the fact that section 135 of the planning code even though there's an a vanes

granted it will reduce my private space to less than 86 square feet from approximately 3 hundred square feet with editions that are made by me over the years and were made under the understanding that at least with the previous owner that i would have use to and of. so again, i request that appeal be overturned on the grounds that will effect the block and the aesthetics of the block there's been the only other subdivision granted in 2008, but i would like you to consider that was sometime ago and the city has changed >> thank you. >> any final questions te