>> thank you so much for hearing our appeal. happy birthday. i'm sorry we're this is taking up your item.time. here is the block we live on. our house is in the middle here. and mr. lee's house is on the right. this is the first subdivision in san francisco.

we made good effort to solve this problem with mr. lee. he has been unwilling to compromise or find a solution. he says he needs a window for ventilation and as a fire exit. both are which are illegal uses of property line window. this is the property line window. our goal is to treat the permit like a new window. for several years that's what i was told would happen by the preservation folks at the planning department. here's the permit. you see the permit. unfortunately you don't see this on the screen.

these are joe duffy's notes about the permit. when i heard it was happening it was crazy. we filed a complaint with d.b.i. mr. lee was able to walk down the dbi to get a permit to change the window. mr. duffy made all kinds of note about this. he circled that it's not a slider. it's an existing slider. it's not a slider. it's a window -- one of the problems is the minor problem is wings out into our property, 2 1/2 feet in our garden. the window is locked. the problem is when it gets

open. it's our kitchen, dining room and bedroom. even if it's open, you can see we're exposed. i can see in and they can obviously see out. with planning we're hoping the design guidelines are taken into conversation -- consideration. what we've been asking for years, i thought this was a very compromise to put a fixed frosted window in. that's the suspension request from the planning department.

here's the view from the sidewalk. you can see right away, there's one window. this is the second window. sorry you can't see it. it's further just moving in. you can see the second window. you can see the panes on the second window what kind of window it is. this is visible from the sidewalk and the street. this is the av009 which talks about light wells and fire exits. you can't use it as ventilation and you have to record a statement that it's a property line window. none of that has happened in this permit. this is the fire code about fire

rating and this was also not included. here's our block. you can see, hopefully you can see this, our block -- everyone has the same house. the exact same house. both sides of the street and on the street behind us, which is now called san carlos. except for the one in the middle, this was the subdivision. you can see your neighbors have the exact same layout, the exact same details. it's easy to see if windows there or not. there's a lot of historical documents about lexington san carlos. the planning commission stay it supposed to be routed through planning despite that it wasn't. this is in pacific heights.

the thing about paper from the '70s about the buildings. the way they were built they really value -- very simple design. they valued light and privacy. here's the documents from the liberty hill historic district about mr. lee's home. he denies it was built in the 1870s. he said it was built in the 1900s. here's our house again and here are other houses on the block. the exact same thing but they have siding. there was not a window on the north side except the second floor bathroom window that nation in your -- looked into

nothing. >> you'll have more time for rebuttal. thank you. >> we'll now hear from the permitholder. mr. lee. you have seven minutes, sir. >> good evening everybody. >> good evening. >> i'm chel lee. i'm owner at 339 lexington. since mr. mcleod moved there, he nonstop complained that the property line window should not open in air space. we agree. mr. mcleod said it's not acceptable because he wants privacy. we agree. since we mostly need it for

light and ventilation. for years, the tenants get along with mr. mcleod until the last tenant. when mr. mcleod block the window from opening. after the tenants protested, mre blockage. we cannot tolerate this. we filed an elder abuse claim to get the window block to remove. the court hearing was on april 10, 2019. the judge ordered him to remove the blockage. i told the judge that i filed an application to change the existing window into a sliding window and it was approved by the san francisco building department. he said that the permit application was flawed. mr. mcleod read it and ask to take a photo of it. the judge denied the request. on april 17, 2019, mr. mcleod

filed appeal for window permit. saying window is not an original window. occupants cannot use the window in case of exits in case of fire. mostly in his brief, he did not provide any written supporting documentation for his claims of privacy, noise, safety or fire escape. the historical building materials claims presented for window not been original window it's not firsthand information. also, historical claims are not specific with regards to specific building, specific ye

year. furthermore in 1900s there were many more small builders than small builders. nobody really knows exactly how the homes were built. the san francisco department building inspector told me if it's approved, the existing side window has not been changed 20 years or more. if this is true, they have satisfied the requirement according to the san francisco assessors report. mr. mcleod bought 333 lexington. mr. mcleod complaint dated 4/1/19 he's open to complaints

property. he stated his goal for this is ideal we should put back the siding for window and he is possibly willing to compromise on the frosted window that he can help us choose. since mr. mcleod brought attention of the problems associated with the window, it as applicable in reverse such as privacy, safety, noise and fire. we want mr. mcleod to work with us to replace the side windows. we feel that it is fair that it should be the same. we should not ask for anything more. that was our concern for the privacy, noise, safety. that's it. >> thank you mr. lee. i have a question. not knowing the outcome of what

this hearing is, are you suggesting replace with frosted sliding? are you planning to put an obscured privacy glass? >> no. that's the problem. mr. mcleod complaint -- >> when it's open. my question is, at the end of the day, this board is going to make the decision. are you willing to put privacy glass or frosted glass? >> i ordered the window already. >> is it frosted glass? >> no it's clear glass. >> thank you. >> thank you. we'll hear from the department of building inspection. >> good evening and welcome. department of building inspection here. there's couple things that look little funny. just on the face of it, it's not

a correct description. that in and of itself also the size of that window, if you figure these houses were built in 1800s, a window that size made out of wood, probably would not have existed. i will say just based on its face value, this permit should probably be turned down. if the permitholder wants to have more time to do some forensic discovery and prove that the window was there originally, i would be open to that. maybe if you want to have somebody come out and look at it after removing some of the covering inside. we can't make him do that. i believe this window is not original. based on its face value, it should be turned down.

abe009, doesn't come in play. when the appellant moved in, the window was already there. ab0009 is for a new hole. you want to find out when this window was put in, we might have a case for that. ab009 is usually when you're trying to put a property line window and next to your neighbor, you have to get their written consent and it has to be fire rated window. that's a new opening. this is an existing opening whether it was original and legal or not, remains to be seen. >> i got a question. do we have a definite date of year built on this property? >> somewhere in the late 1800s. >> is it 1900s. >> there's still not going to be a window that size. >> not to argue, i have two 1900 properties and they've got

really big windows in them. one of my properties the windows there was a house next to it. the tenant opens the window. >> these all appear to be built around the same time. they are very close in architecture to each other. the same builder quite possibly built all of these. >> we have one right now that has really large patio that i never seen last 500 homes. >> it could have been built originally. i have no way of knowing that. it's on the permitholder to give us little more information or backgrounding in that regard. we want to open up the wall, we can look at the framing and tell you. >> unless there's information otherwise to prove that it was not -- we have cases where the

department shows pictureses of the property 1992 without that window. we have definite that opening was not there. it's been there forgive. in this particular case, if there's no evidence that the window was there, i'm looking at the pictures, the casings and the style looks similar to the original windows in the bathrooms. >> it does look similar. i have no way of knowing that. only way of knowing is opening up the inside and see what the framing consist of. if you can see framing consist with the original built. yes. >> that process you described is that what we do in cases where we aren't sure when a window is created? >> i haven't run across this before. this is the first one that i've

seen that there's not some record that it was done illegally or originally. >> can you walk us through the permitting process that happened with this. now you're saying the permit was not properly issued. whenever it was issued it seem to be proper. >> the description is not correct. they're not replacing a sliding glass. they're replacing a casement. which wings out over the property line which is kind of rare. i'm not saying it doesn't happen. we don't have those situations somewhere in the city. especially if one building was built quite a few years prior to the adjacent building could happen. that being said, the ab009 will come in play if we deem that's a new opening. that's an original opening, then

ab009 doesn't come in play. >> thank you. >> follow-up question to that. we talked about property line windows periodically. what about the fire safety issue in that as it is being replaced and as it is a new window, does it has to be replaced up a current code standard? >> as far as i know, you can replace it with the same type of window as long as you're not increasing the opening. >> this is not the same type of window. >> you're not changing the size. >> the conditions for to change the -- for the life fire safety

issue, it would be changing the size of the window, not have that window works? >> correct. if you had a two foot opening, now you have a 4-foot opening. that would trigger it. you're increasing the size of the window area. >> the current deputy the window, it opens into the neighbor's property completely off limits. >> that would not happen. >> today you would have to have a fire rated window there. >> the issue that we are grappling with, if the owner can prove that window was in place originally, the only issue that we are grappling with really is the issue of privacy and whether that window should be permanently closed and whether that window should be opaque. >> they didn't go through

planning, planning probably should have looked at this also. that being said, if it is proven to be original, they can put in a sliding window and it should be fine. >> whether it's opaque or otherwise or can we -- we can ask that. >> it wasn't built with opaque glass. >> we have that issue come up quite a bit. >> last question. let's assume that it was original and the replacing in kind.

it does not need to be fire rated win that happens? >> no. if you're not increasing the size of the window, you don't have to make it a fire window. >> thank you. we'll hear from the planning department. >> good evening. cory teague planning department staff. planning department recommends that the commission grant the appeal and deny this permit for various reasons. the subject permit was filed and issued on april 4th this year. however, it was in aid when it was submitted. which means it never came to the planning department for review. it does require planning department review additionally

replacing windows even though that have not visible by the street. it requires certificate of appropriateness from the historic preservation commission. additionally, in october of last year, the appellant filed a black book notation on this property to be notified any permits that were submitted for this property. because the permit did not come planning department and we did not provide that innovation to th--notification to the neighbo. as you seen, just address this issue as well, it appears the glass of the existing window is to some degree, privacy glass. this was they do talk about certain types of issues with

privacy. i feel confident in this situation from the planning department, we want to see that replaced with privacy glass as well. for all those reasons, we would recommend that the permit be -- appeal be granted and permit be denied. i know there's piece of information relative to the date when this buildings was constructed. i was looking we do have very specific dates of years of construction. for many buildings, it's sometime prior to 1900. we don't know. those that are pre1900 and we don't have an exact date for it, it's rounded up, it kind of give the impression that the actual year when actually catch all for 1900 or earlier.

i'm available for any questions. >> i got a couple. >> i want to know little bit more about the process to figure out if this is or not an original window. can you talk about the research and maybe how that would or wouldn't coincide to opening up the window to see what it looks like so we'll be able to tell by workmanship. >> because this would require certificate of appropriateness, there will be certain amount of information we would acquire about the existing window. there are number of ways you can go by doing that. you can general -- that is something we would ask property owner to do. it may involve opening up the window and looking at the

construction methodology and material. it's possible we'll have that work to be done. whether or not that window was original to the building. we would probably pull a complete permit history. >> just to understand what would happen if the applicant were to not move forward with the permit and continue with the window as is. that would be allowed. >> from permitting perspective. correct. there's nothing here that was requiring the property owner to replace this window. there's nothing on the record now that would require them to take that action and replace this window. >> okay. i think that's all the questions i have for now.

>> cory. there's no notice of violation on the property now? >> no. there was a complaint filed by the appellant recently part of of this process overall. when this was when the permit was issued, there was no complaint with planning and there's not any of the issue on this case. >> other thing is, the 6 1/2 years i've been on this board, usually it's never come up that someone had to prove that was an original piece on the property. i've not heard that in all the many cases that we're here. to me that's quite a bit of process for a homeowner to undertake. i think the city should have the record to substantiate that.

>> i wasn't trying to insinuate we would require them to date when that window was added. if that was a piece of information that was relevant being issued, we would have to go through the process with property owner of doing the best. we could with a documentation and consulting available to make that determination. if dating when that window was added is not relevant, only thing is relevant what you're putting in. we would not require them to go through that. >> can you talk more about that. let's say they can't figure out when the window was put in. what is the planning department looking for? what is the factors that influence either receiving or not having certificate of

appropriateness. >> i'll do the best i can. i'm not a preservation planner. we want to look at what's being proposed to be put into that opening. what the new window that's being provide and how is that relate to the existing historic resource. >> if it was decided, the type of window you're proposing is not -- this style of window is the more appropriate window given the age, whatever design of your building. >> correct. we're legatee's thet looing atd materials. it will be required to be fire rated etcetera would be under the purview the department of building inspection. >> when the opening happening, --

>> sorry. are there any historic photos of this property from the department? >> i don't know if we have any from the department. while we were here, i did check the information we have available online for the liberty hill historic district. the vary that was done in that area. for certain buildings they do have files that include pictures and information and documentation about when it was constructed. we did not have that for this building. >> do you know what that room is? is that a living room or bedroom? >> i believe that was mentioned in the briefs that i don't know off top of my head. i thought it was a bedroom. i'm not positive. >> thank you. >> did i hear you affirmatively that this permit was improperly issued by the planning

department >> no. it was not reviewed by the planning department. it should have been routed to the planning department for review. >> you stated that the permit was improperly issued? >> correct. >> secondly, we heard mr. curran talk about while this window open into the neighbor's property line, does this set up automatically the opportunity for notice of violation? it has been discovered that there's a window that is not exactly legal because it goes into the neighbor's property line without permission? >> that specific issue is not addressed in the planning code.

>> i should ask mr. curran and the next part, whether that would narrate a notice of violation as recently discovered is a win toe that -- windows that opens across the property line. >> correct. from taur perspective, we don't address that situation. if we did -- if it was legally done, now it's not conforming to the code, that would not be a violation. it would be allowed to stay that way. i can't speak to the building code. >> thank you very much. >> we have lots of questions for you. welcome back. >> thank you. is there any public comment on

this item. please approach. >> good evening and welcome. >> hi. thank you. good evening president swig, commissioners. i'm president of the liberty hill neighborhood association and historic district. i live directly across from mr. lee's property for 32 years. i'm aware that his side window opening into mr. mcleod's way has been constant problem for the mr. mcleod for years. liberty hill's historic breezeway are architectural features of of this district they include light rails and

they maintain privacy because none of the original houses had ground floor side windows. mr. lee's property line window is clearly later addition but there's no permit to date this alteration. in recent conversation mr. lee proudly declared that he's never pulled permits for anything and had no intention of doing so. mr. lee was force to pull a permit after mr. mcleod filed a complaint. he claimed had an existing sliding window. he doesn't. trying to circumvent, mr. lee filed another permit which d.b.i. granted. none permitted work sidesteps the review process that would have resolved this situation. instead, mr. mcleod made attempts to work out reasonable

solutions that mr. lee's lack of cooperation really stands out on a block where neighbors interact and work things out. i've been mr. mcleod's which and frankly mr. lee's opposing window make you feel like you're in a fish bowl. a solution would be for mr. lee to install a frosted glass window that would minimize the impact of both sight and sound for mr. mcleod and allow late for mr. lee. please uphold mr. mcleod complaint and resolve this issue. i've been in touch with our architectural historian who helped write the statement for liberty hill historic district. he agrees this house was built in 1876 like all the rest of the houses on the street and didn't have any of these windows.

i'm submitted for sunshine 150 words. >> i got a question. i want to clarify. it's been stated in the brief and repeated, there's no ground floor windows. you're referring to property line windows. the rear home of the appellant has side windows. >> yes, the ground floor windows were in the back which were the kitchen and they were facing the rear. >> i have a question too. being long-term neighbor of the block, i been into most of the homes. we've all been in their houses and they've been in mine. have you ever been in window and observed that there was no

window there? have you been in that property prior or neighboring property and seen that window? >> i only been in the neighboring property. i've never seen -- >> are you aware -- some people love their neighborhood more so than others. that's a san francisco thing. do you think the historian -- have you talked about having prior blueprints or anything of that property showing it's original without the window? >> no, i haven't that specifically. some the recordings were lost. we know from the architectural eachs this was the trea.

>> we had big fire 1906 and that caused a little bit of issue. >> i can attest to though, the blueprints of all these houses were originally the same and the vast majority are pretty consistent. >> even in the '20s and turn of the century, people always have individual taste and desires. what one person wants one person does not want. even though you look at the same barrel front sun set home, they all have a different flavor to them. >> the whole point of these properties, they were done as the first speculative houses. they were all the same. >> thank you. >> thank you. is there any more public comment. we'll move o on to rebuttal.

>> they said this is built in the '50s or '60s. dimensional lumber did not come into use until after world war ii. they said it's probably that. >> i cannot live in this house if that window is open. we've been lucky. we've had great relationship with the kids.

they're always kids. they come in every year. he gets three new boys, party on in that house. the only time that window is open was about two years ago. i woke up in the middle of the night. i thought someone was in our house. they had that window open. just wide open and playing video games and having a party. the noise is huge. i'm going to call the cops every time that window is open. i will even walk down to the police station and bring them back to my house. you causing hundreds of years of problems with that house and the police. the other problem is our privacy. we have to get curtains on every window. we have to turn up the heater because that house was made so that light come in. we have to turn the heater on and turn the lights on because

we have curtains on six windows. that will cost hundreds of dollars. >> i want top say one thing. this is all about safety and privacy. it's not just how old this window is. this thing opens as big as a door. i tried to with mr. lee and compromise. the fact he's going out to get a clear window is crazy to me. >> the thing that bother me most, probably two years after we moved in, i two girls and they are grown up now. i said mr. lee, what i'm worried about one of your mini-tenants jumping in my backyard and molesting my kids. it's easy to get in my backyard from their house. why not. easy, we're out of town and they're in the backyard. >> what we really care about is it's so easy.

it's such easy access to get in our house through this window. it makes no sense. there's no way this window was original. i hope vote not on this end but to end this whole issue. the fixed frosted window, he'll get 20 square feet of light >> thank you. >> i have questions for you guys. can you describe the work that you did to close his window? >> what did you do to close the window? >> i piece of scrap wood like a foot long and i put it up against the window and screwed underneath the window to keep it from opening. >> you're aware it wasn't on his property that it happened? >> it is against the ceiling that overhangs my property.

>> did that seem like a good idea to screw that? >> i should have clamped it. >> you did that without permission? >> it wasn't without permission. i wrote him before i did it. i asked him, i explained exactly what i was going to do. >> did he provide permission. >> no. >> i want to make sure that you understand, the permit is denied. the window could remain. >> i'm aware of that. he can't open it. >> can i understand, is your expectation that window should be privacy glass but your window should not? >> our windows are on the property line. >> i want to make sure i understand that. i want to understand what the bigger issue are. privacy, safety and noise. it seems that noise is an issue that's not before us in terms of

our jurisdiction. it would be a matter it take up with the sfpd. in term of privacy, they are both windows. they have a feature by which you can see into and out of them. it seems odd to be concerned about having curtains that could open or close. sometimes you can see into it and not. i'm confused that seems to be a challenge. having curtains would be a great imposition. >> when they built the homes, they were built so simply to let light in. that was the whole idea putting, it's the south side where the light comes from. to let the light in. these houses are tiny. the idea if you put curtains on them, you don't get the light

in. >> you're suggesting that we close the curtains. why does he get to put a clear window -- >> i'm trying to understand objection to the curtain. >> i can cover the window. that's property and i can cover his window. >> if you permit to build up to the property line, you can cover the window. perhaps you can look at the fencing height that you could put. a fence there. there's some solutions on your property that you can take advantage of. you're right. there are some other ideas you can follow up. i'm not the planning department. >> simply, if we deny the

permit, he can leave the window as it is? >> yes. >> i'm making a suggestion. if we get the sliding glass in obscure glass. >> we don't want openable wind window. >> i work on the weekends. >> let me finish. you would rather have windows as they are there now rather than having a new slider that has -- that's what you want. >> wait. i don't understand. existing windowses condition be open -- >> there's no notice of violation, there's no issue with the current window. if we denied the permit that window stays in kind as it is. if we can accept the permit, we deny the appeal but condition that the permit has a sliding

glass with obscure glass in there rather than clear? >> why does he get openable window? why does he get to build a door in our house? >> why does he get to open. that's trespassing? >> question a and question b. if we leave that, if you don't like the window there, you can call the building department and planning department. if we deny the appeal, he doesn't have to repair in window. he can leave that window as it is. would you like us to replace it with a slider that does not open up in your property? >> what about door number three? which is a fixed frosted window. which gives him 20 square feet of light. >> it's not working. thank you. >> you can be seated. we'll hear from the helicopter

-- permitholder. mr. lee. you have three minutes. >> i disagree with the department, when he said all windows. all windows should not be large. this is our exceptions. i don't believe that at all. also the planning department, usually when they talk about approximate, 1900s or 1870s, it's never exact day and year. it's very hard to say that was original window built exactly at that date. i don't agree with that also.

mr. mcleod complaining about original window. take a look at the pictures. he has a windows there. what's true for me is also true for him. >> unfortunately, as far as i see, according to the planning department, what makes you get really wonderful rent because it's in a beautiful neighborhood. it's also going to restrict you in the permit that were issued orthe counter in the permits that were issued over the counter have been issued in

error. that means that if you want a permit for that window, you're going to have to go through the process of planning department. what you also heard him say that you might as well leave that window alone because it's going to open can of worms. >> yes. my understanding if i apply for the permit, is it visible from the street. >> it's not just baiz it's visible. it's because that area that home is in is designates a specific area that has to go through the planning department. no matter whether it's visible from the street or not. >> i can leave the window as is. >> that's what i heard from the department. >> what happens if he nail my window shut again? >> you'll be back in court with them again. unfortunately, we see this all the time.

it's tit for tat. i guess that's rental for you. you might want to talk to your tenants about maybe keeping it closed. that would make things deescalate. >> i can tell them -- it window has a cylinder. i can tell them just open it. that's why it's a seal. >> that's between you. thank you very much. >> thank you. mr. teague or mr. curran do you have anything further? >> good evening. i want to clarify. seem like you guys moving towards to fix this here. this has to go to the h.p.c. even if the board granted the appeal with the condition that resulted in window they thought fixed the problem. we would still require them to

get a c of a. you can be hearing that again. i want to make that clear. i don't think we'll resolve this today because there's separate process to go through. if they don't replace the wind window, it was mentioned that there could be a possibility the appellant on their property could explore under the planning code what kind of work they'll be able to do. it would not require touching or damaging the neighboring building. it could be explored. >> can we have the building department come up too? >> let me finish. say we issued the permit. what will the planning department say? >> we would say they have to get

certificate of appropriateness. if that certificate of appropriateness ultimately determine that approved in the permit okay. everything is fine. if it determines something different they have to get a new permit. >> thank you. >> just fur our benefit and benefit of the permitholder. he would come back in to file another permit for the certificate of propertiness and come back to building? what will be part of your investigation or your consideration? >> just what type of window it's

going to be. it probably can't be vinyl based on what the planning department says. whatever criteria they hold him it, they will check the installation. as far as building code, it goes back to was it legal or not. we had no prior complaints about it in 1999. >> i was to make sure i understand it. the planning department was saying they are concern more if it fits the appropriateness of the building. not so much when it was installed or that record because the records are lost or burned up who knows where the records are. you're saying it matters if it was original or not. who's doing the proving. >> nobody has to prove anything at this point. as far as we were concerned prior to any of this, there were no complaints about it. it was never brought to our

attention. only thing that triggers the planning approval if you change the window. >> can you talk about the compliments that was received in the d.b.i. or if it was planning? >> there was complaint to planning for the window and how it wait went through the proces. joe duffy wrote a notice violation. it didn't go through the steps. >> has it been resolved? >> no. that's what brought them here. >> thank you. >> i'm just like commissioner honda, i'm projecting what will happen if. >> if we took mr. teague's statement we upheld the appeal

base the on the fact that the permit was not properly issued as mr. teague has stated. that's the end of that. permit goes away. let's say that the -- mr. lee says i'm over it. i'm going to keep the window as it is. do i project the possibility or would you project the possibility that because this window as has been noted opens into the neighbor's -- crosses the property line into the neighbor's space, that the neighbor then would come to you and complain notice of violation because this window opens into my property or is that the end of the line and this window is going so stay as it is?

>> i think it will be more civil issue. d.b.i. doesn't get involved in property line issues. it would only have to be compliant in the year it was built. who knows -- i don't know in what order they were built. with that property there the year before, two years before. we have them all over the city. where these things exist and they have existed until people don't get along. >> that's the reason for my question i'm trying to disclose to all parties the potential continuance the opportunity if one step is taken versus the other. commissioner honda was very wise in projecting to the appellant that we could take steps here to assure those windows became opaque and that might be something they want to settle with.

or if we follow mr. teague's advice, it was improperly issued and also with the notice that it's going t to go scrutiny, we deny the appeal. [please stand by].

on this particular thing, my opinion is we have to accept the appeal on the grounds that it was issued improperly -- that the permit was issued improperly because it requires planning approval. >> commissioner: that is why i asked the question, was the permit improperly issued? if it is, we have no choice but to uphold on the appeal on the basis that permit was improper will i issued as claimed by the planning department. so i don't think we have a choice. >> commissioner: there's more to it. we were told there was the wrong description on the permit of the existing window. so it was erroneous in a number of ways. exactly. >> i have no intention of trying to fool around with that.

>> that's my motion. >> okay. so we have a motion from commissioner honda to grant the appeal, overturn d.b.i. irn issuance of the permit on the basis that it should have been reviewed by the planning department. on that motion, commissioner lazarus. >> aye. >> a commissioner tanner. >> aye. >> a president swig. >> aye. >> that carries 4-0 and the appeal is granted the >> may we take a break, please. let's say 5 minutes. >> 5-minute >> welcome back to the june 19, 2019 meeting of the board of appeals. we are now on items 7a and 7b. these are appeal number 19-034 and