>> good evening welcome to the november 13th meeting of board of appeals. president lopez will be the presiding officer joined by john traz vina and rick swig and deputy city attorney will provide legal advice. >> you will be joined by representative from thes city departments that will be presented before the board this evenings. we have corey teague the za reporting planning and kevin birmingham with department of building inspection. board guidelines requests that you turn off all phone and electronics so they will not

disturb. no eating or drink the rules are appellates, permit holds and respondents begin 7 minutes to present case and 3 for rebuttal. people affiliated meant within the periods. the parties are upon begin low minutes with no rebuttal. members of the public have up to 3 minutes each to address the board and no rebuttal. >> mr. longway will give you a warning 30 seconds before your time is up. the board has a vacancy 3 votes are required. if you have questions e mail at sf got. org. we will have the ability to

receive public comment for each and sfgov.org is providing closed captioning. tell be rebroadcast on friday's at 4 p.m. on channel 26. etch scombroo if you want to a peesh via zoom go to the website and click on the boa hear for example today and click the zoom link on the right side of the page if you mean want to call in the number is 1-669-9 hh sfgov.org is broadcast and streaming the instructions across the screen if you are watching the broadcast.

[reading instructions] now we will swear in all those who

intends to testify. anyone may speak without an oath. if you intend to testify tonight and wish to have the board give your testimony evidenceary weight raise your right hand and say, i do after sworn or affirmed. do you swear that the testimony you are about to give the truth and nothing but the truth? >> thank you. if you are a participate and not speaking put your skroom speaker on mute. we have one housekeeping item the party for item 6 would like the matter finished to december 11, 2024 to work on an agreement. we would need a motion and vote and i will make a call for public comment. >> commissioner trasvina. >> thank you president i move to continue this matter to the next meeting december 11th. >> okay is there public comment

on this motion to continue this item to december 11th? anyone on zoom? on this motion president lopez. >> aye >> commissioner swig. >> aye >> that carries 3-0 the matter is continued to december 11th. >> we are now moving on to item one general public comment. this is an opportunity for anyone who would like to speak within the board's jurisdiction that is not on tonight's calendar is well a member who wishes to speak on an item not on tonight's agenda? anyone on zoom in we'll move on to item 2. commissioner comments and questions. >> commissioners anything? we can move on. >> okay. nothing we will move on to item three. and this is the adoption of the minutes. xhfrns before you borrow discussion other minutes of october 30, 2024 meeting.

>> commissioners unless there is any comment i will move to approve the minutes. >> is there public comment on the motion to adopt the minutes? i don't see anyone on zoom of this motion vice president trasvina. >> aye >> commissioner swig. >> minutes are adopted >> we're moving to item 4 jurisdiction request. subject property 85 homestead street. letter from helene cohen asking that the board take jurisdiction over plumbing permit 20210105587 issueod january 5, 2021. appeal ended january 20 and timed at the office on october 21, 2024. permit holder virginia das the description work category 1p. replace sewer line from foundation to house trap. we'll hear from will ms. cohen

first. you have 3 minutes. we will not start the time until you are ready. >> i have a couple of pictures but i'm going to going to read i have a 3 little pages to read. il read this, first. >> so, i'm hel heen cohen i own 7981 homestead for 44 years. i bought my house in 1980 and there were two sewer fresh air vent in my front stair case one for my house and one for the neighbor. two separate suers. since 1980 the owner of 85 homestead passed away and new owner bought the house 20 years ago. sewer fer 85 homestead broke and a health and safety hazzard in front of my stair case. i phoned the owner got no

sponse. put in the complaint online for the hazzard to be corrected. when it was corrected please move their suetory in front of their own house. i spoke with david the plumbing inspector told me he is not moving the sewer. i don't own sidewalk. i can suit neighbor fiwant and implied ease am. he never told me i can appeal a sewer city sewer permit for my neighbor. there were no plans. . no postings. no notifications. no right to appeal at all. i phoned puc and spoke to linda and add administrator there and she said not her department she is puc but if a sewer combraks he was under the is supposed to made right, too. i talked to steve pin ellie and

asked him to move sewer. in front of the house it belonged. he never told me i had appeal rights. i told him i don't believe it is implied easement it is pre-existing but >> the need the necessarity for to be there no long upper exists when i spoke to puc they said all suers the code is to put it within the confined owner's property line. that was plumbing replaced the sewer 28 feet from my neighbor the side of her house. i sent all the way across the sidewalk and have a few pictures. to in front of and put it in a different place. it was in the grandfathered inform they moved it from in front of my front stair case to by the curve. fresh air vent makes voice.

to beingic gas coming out. . it was only two weeks ago that ace plumbing replaced the sewer from my other neighbor and talked to the owner jan than millington and said you should apply for a hearing an appeal i never heard of this before. so the reason nobody told me no notification. >> thank you that is time >> yes we have a question for you from vice president trasvina. okay. >> can i read my last sentence? >> its okay. >> i'm sorry >> i'm sure you can find a way of including your last sentence in the response. so under our rule for jurisdiction request, requires that the we find that the city intentionally caused the requestor to be late in filing the appeal. >> correct.

you described for me how your request fit this is requirement. >> yes. >> the reason is so i own that property for 44 years and i have my house, too. so i -- the only time i thought a person had appeal rights i never knew was if there were postings. so the way the inspector responded to me you know i don't own the sidewalk. choose the neighbor. not moving the sewer. it is implied easement. that's it. and that's what everybody told me will, i believe that they should have told me that -- if you don't like this you can file an appeal or may be sent me a letter or put up a post nothing front of my house where they were digging. i believed that with no postings, nothing in writing.

and no verbal notification. that they intentionally did not tell me my rights. >> okay. >> thank you, my other question is whether you are stating that the sewer that your neighbor put in is in violation of any code and if so, have you filed a complaint on it for being in violation? >> when it broke i filed the complaint the viewer cap was up. the hole was there. it was messy. it was in front of my house and i put in the dbi complaint online. they sent it to the inspector who closed it because the neighbor filed for a permit. to have it fixed. so, can you repeat the question >> what i want to know and may

be can you star with yes or no and see where your answer guess are you saying the sewer as it is today in november of 2024, is in violation of code? or are you not saying that? >> i believe this it is. i than it is. >> it is in violation of a code. because can i alex. can i show? you don't i'm not asking you how i'm asking your position is. >> my next question is are you filing a complaint about that? in your view a current violation are you filing a complaint about that anywhere? >> no. i just i wanted it -- so to answer your question, from what sfpuc told me is it is not code it is supposed to be within

confines of the person that the house that it belongs to. that is one thing. >> okay. >> then >> itch am not asking how it is in violation i want to know whether you believe it is you told me you do believe it is in violation. >> i do it is in violation where it is supposed to be when they replace today, since there was no plans or notification, i had a ground break penetrating. i'm not interested in how it is i want to know whether you pole feel it is you explained to me you believe it is currently in violation. that's all i wanted to know. >> yes. >> thank you. >> and were just to upon i took an oath i'm not so i believe it was not done correctly and still not correct. i don't know that violation. >> thank you your time is up. >> you can be seated.

no further questions we'll hear from the permit holder mrs. das via zoom. >> this is earny behalf can you hear me >> yes, you have 3 minutes. >> i'm william mrs. das. first, the work is all done. mrs. das spent 16 thousand dollars resleeving what was the last roll connection. . the lateral correction on homestead is odd because it was fill in the the late 50s and 60s. to which change the slope of the street. that's upon so -- everything is in place for years and years. >> the complaints about, a little cap in the sidewalk is something that can be fixed for 15 dollars. that was not the problem the problem was the pipe got clogged up by roots and such.

jenny spent 16 thousand dollars that work has been done for 45 months now. there is not an excuse for every day of the 45 months in the late filing. i think that you would have to find upon that -- there was an excuse for the 45 months instead the applicant for the jurisdiction request is said that she knew in january of 2021 the same thing from the puc that she thinks gives her a code violation. at this point. >> it is a new argument. here oralally there is a code violation that is not found in the papers. that is not something that we have a dhoons spondz to because there is no code section called out. were the inspector was all over this project. he was out and will talked to mrs. cohen about the project the

time project was going on. she voiced the same concern where the point is she is now voicing. it is not true the applicanted here believes that only if there is postings that there is a chance to appeal. she reasonable obtained the permit about 18 months ago. and she never posted the permit and her property. instead she nailed notices the two next door neighbors just with the case in this in plumbing permit. she knows baptists right of the appeal ask know its is in the limited to where you post in front of the house she has a million dollars project under way that was never posted her house when the permit was granted there is no doubt we put in papers that her architect

told her there was a right of appeal of a building permiteen if there was not a posting on the outside of the house. >> this is remembers upon very were frustrating the work is done. thank you. will time >> okay >> thank you. >> i don't see any questions at this time. did the planning department want to weigh in? >> no >> dbi? >> good evening am president lopez and member this is is a plumbing permit 3-1/2 years oldsism talked to chief and senior inspector about this. and it was -- there was a complaint baurl call in the for damage sewer lines liking they went out and talked to the owners and said they needed a permit to replace the line the line was replace instead same location the configuration is

differents they moved the vent close to the street so it was out of the public right of way. work was completed. chief did mention that he believeless it is appellate is planning to do work in the house if that point come he is glad to help relocate the line because of the slope of the street and the sloecht pipe coming out it has to be in the location it is in now. there is am the permit was properly issued. reviewed and inspections took place. you know not much more we can say >> thank you we'll have a question from commissioner swig and president lopez. >> thank you very much. nice to see you back. >> unexpected call away the last minute. >> so, what -- commissioner trasvina read -- if the city

errored to properly inform then that would be a basis for this? what bothers me here it is here say what bothers me the city employment said to a citizen of who was affected by this, basicsly, stuff it. because we are going to dot work and that's the way it is. that's you know that's it. and -- give me -- you know give me -- that -- is one thing i would like feedback the other one is -- give us annual education am. i know is this having owned multiple home in san francisco that if my sidewalk breaks i gotta fix it. and i know i don't own it but i'm responsible for it. is the same thing so who owns

the sidewalk and is the easement for a sidewalk i don't answer, obviously. is the easement for the sidewalk given to the 73 or the access when well is access to a sidewalk or under it. is had an easement to the city? the homeowner, own the planned what is the dinap and i can who has the right sns >> for the first point i can't talk to what conversation went between the two. may be they tuesday i don't know >> but as far as the sidewalk guess it is i joint ownership. however the sewer line under city plumbing permit. city inspectors that will inspect it to the point the clean out is then from this point to the edge of the sidewalk to the street belongs to the city. they upkeep it so the damage was between the clean out and the

edge of the property. and -- it is will this sworn strange because the slope and the slope coming out. >> engineering question jouchl can't make water flow uphill have you to tie to a down stream point and you know this came out in the 50s and replaced the same location and like you said, i believe you said she is planning on putting in a garage and reconfiguring the sidewalk for a driveway at that point now they will do more work as far as may be trying to get the sewer line in a different pointful now it is properly put in and properly inspected as far as all i know the notices went out. it is even hard to tell where it is but you know it has to go where it is. >> the other question that was raised and you made troefrns it. it was a repair.

>> yes >> and it was not a capitol program it was a repair there is difference with repair maintenance and a discretionary >> they did not -- yes yoochlt improvement. so -- if it is a repair, is at this time same level permit right that you would have as if a discretionary we are puff negligence a new program? there was a -- due to either your department's discretion or a need legislative need compliance need. a slight deviation where -- a

valve or release was placed. but apples to apples now a green to red but not apples to grapefruit, a sewer was maintained and fixed? >> is that true? >> yes if they would relocate it would required plans. >> right. >> is there a difference in noticing and permitting between a repair and maintenance and necessity due to a breakage versus a capitol program we are redog the sue and and decide to if you in front of your house >> not as far as the public is correspond. permit is a permit >> thank you. >> okay >> president lopez. my question is -- we heard the h word say a bit ago there were

some comments relay by the appellate from a puc representative about you know a sewer line need to be within the property lines of00 autoproperty owner. you common knowledge and experience is that something that -- you are familiar with or give you know way to an enforcement action? >> it is not a hard and fast rule. would like it to be in your property lines to meet the slope if you cross on the sidewalk which was almost public right-of-way have you the right it cross at that point ump come out of your building on your property you can divert to catch downhill line of the sewer. you would love to have it within your own property preponder line extending across the sidewalk i don't believe typeset is

required or necessary. e spchl it is hard to make water flow up you gotta go downhill. >> thank you. gi will say if she believe list is a code violation. file a complaint we will look at it and at that point if they want to inspectors engage with puc and say, you know look at it but by all means file a complaint we will be happy to go out >> vice president trasvina. >> thank you for your left all your comments and the left one. that's what i was trying to goet with mrs. on cohen this is a procedural hearing she has complaints about the substance. and our issue tonight suspect whether or not she can over come the procedural hurdles to bring those to us. you are saying that there is another forum for those

substantive arounds kwl valid or no. 80 percent chance of agreement or not. that she can file if she feels currently that the sewer is out of compliance. she has the ability to file a complaint. >> absolutely >> thank you >> no further questions. >> we are now moving on to public comment. anyone in the room momentes to provide public comment? anyone on zoom, raise your hands? >> i don't see anyoneful commissioners this matter is submitted. >> commissioners we will start with commissioner swig for comments. >> okay. down from the top. i recognize the upset of the homeowner. . i recognize that the homeowner heard a city employee say we are doing it here and that's

temperature that is here say. the lack of paperwork were and noticing and mr. birmingham said the proper noticing was done >> i did not follow up weather he had confused. thee is shaking his head there was no formal noticing of this activity. that takes me to the proper were notice was not done by city. then i move down to the second piece of what is you know what i'm hear suggest that other from an engineering stand point. what would most likely happen according to mr. birmingham is they would come in and say, okay tht only place we can if you you can't have water go uphill that is true. they would say commissioners, if you have a way for water to go

uphill, please, present this. we would look at them dumb founded we don't know how to do water uphill. third piece is relief the relief for this home oernld be begin via a hearing the case and endingum where i said there is no satisfaction other than everybody's time and money is wasted. or -- as was questioned and noticed, that this store senot over yet for the homeowner. she can file for when are she think system a notice of violation and probably get the same satisfaction to hear the case heard to investigate alternatives of replace that is a relocation of the sewer. and the venting. and the same thing that would occur as if we upheld her

appeal. >> so that is where i stand and looking forward to hearing from my fellow commissioners to see if they can choose one for aor b which is do we find for the appellate and dot hearing now. or violate option of going the other direction getting the notice of violation hearing heard and even in the notice of violation if not be satisfied with that she can appeal that. so there is nothing lost by losing the appeal tonight. so, commissioner trasvina love to hear your thoughts. >> thank you, commissioner swig. i want to thank everyone who testified on this matter. we have two home ordinance here. we have one who did the work 33 months or so ago and thought it was done. he had complied with everything.

and perhaps they have, i would as much as i have spoken so much over -- my time here about communication from the city to the public. getting if the supervisors involved to hymn members of the public understands upon what the rights and responsibilities are. and how. -- neighbors should be speak with each other. i would be hesitant to reopen this case when i know that as mr. birmingham reiterated, mrz cohen as a forum available if she feels the sewer is out of compliance. that is the bottom line. is there a violation of code or not? well is a forum to do that. i would and as the sewer owner stated, he does not has not been told what code has been

violated. and he does not have opportunity upon tonight to say it is or is not. i believe that00 autoright foresum with the department photocopy there is a complaint about a violation that she can make that complaint and as you know commissioners we will they may be back here but that is the proper way to handle this matter. which is to say that it is not met the requirements for rehearing. or jurisdiction q. i would can devote to deny the request. >> i would echo that and you know -- let the appellate know that this -- action that you filed jurisdiction question has a narrow and specific procedural basis for us it decide the question -- and based on -- that

standard -- i'm not sure we have the hard evidence of intentional or inadvertent action on the part of the city to cause this delay for the filing. so that is the body news. good news is as has been you know spoke tone on our panel by mr. birmingham, there is still an avenue open for you subassistantive avenue to file enforcement action to followum with mr. birmingham with dbi. to see if there is a code violation there. and so i hope that you can finds upon some solace there that testimonies looks like we may not give you relief here this evening there is still a door open because at the end of the day, the city has every interest in enforcing the code.

and feign it will not come in through this avenue that you pursued if there is an issue i have no doubt they will work with you and with your neighbor to address that issue. with that i will move. to deny the jurisdiction request on the basis that it is standards have not been met. >> okay. we have no comments at this point. we have a motion from president lopez to deny "on basis the city did not cause the requestor to be late in filing the appeal on that motion vice president trasvina >> yes >> commissioner swig. >> before i say, aye i would advice the appellate to before he leaves she can get the path to satisfaction. >> okay. and i support the motion. >> okay. that motion carries 3-0 the request is denied. mr. chairman cohen connect with mr. birmingham.

thank you. >> so we are moving on to item 5. dbi, planning approval. property 557 wisconsin street appealing the issuance on september 13 to tiffany tran of an oolteration permit roof deck at rear of single family dwelling. new roof. hatch and stairs to the roof. we will hear from the appellates first. welcome. you have 7 minutes. >> before we begin i had a point of order or question for president lopez. i'm trying to understand the role of mr. ylang in this matter. is she an appellate? or is she a neighbor? i see here that -- the appeal is from two individuals the brief

is from 3 individuals. >> at the time the appeal was filed mrs. ylang was not an appellate she submitted public comment. >> so. just we are clear then she would not have the ability to seek a rehearing >> that's correct. >> and she would have separate time >> she can speak during public comment >> thank you. >> were clarify it. >> i'm sorry are you mrs. ylang >> if you can speak in the microphone. >> do i need to wait until public hear to speak because we share the same condo. the same hoa. i'm not. my name is not @as an appellate.

jury room am [inaudible] my partner and i own 5 and karen owns the unit above us and bought them the same time and shared hoa the occurrence representative of both of our units. i would request if we could both copresent now. >> issue is she did submit written comment. so in affect they had two briefs we should limit her to public comment. >> i have no objection to your impact, your ability to file, there is just you are sort of in our paperwork in two different roles has an impact on you as if you are an appellate. . you have the rights of an appellate. if you are a member of the public a party rather a witness you don't have the right to appeal in the on this matter.

after this hearing i want to make sure that everybody understands had role you have. i would look to president lopez. to taik make a decision or clarify. >> we are okay with waiting we have 7 minutes to speak is that correct. so i will together we would not take more than 7 minute if this is okay we understand her not having the rights of an appellate if she speaks now. its just i think our case we both have common occurrence. so and currently tried file an appeal hers did not go through she filed after mine that is where we are. we are open top what you suggest. yea. >> the best case for you as far

as gross minutes to be spent on testifying and you request correct me yourself speak for your 7 minutes and in public comment i'm sorry your partner or roommate. partner. >> public comment peek for another 3. what commissioner trs vina is getting at if somebody if we find not to your satisfaction and you want a rehearing, you yourself, can apply for rehearing your partner as a commenter cannot. >> so in gross numbers of comments and commentary, 7 plus flee versus if you copresent for the purpose you are coappellates

and both of you can are ask for a follow up hearing. >> yea. i think that is true. >> yes, and frankly i don't think she can bey identified as a coappellate the fact they are later add her name to the brief where you saw it is not relevant she submitted separate public comments it would be unfair they would submit two briefs. idea of split it is nice >> legally it is better you are in public comment take your 3 minutes and legally it is better you take all 7 minutes. and that's i think that is more beneficial. >> okay. >> if i could add i. it make sure she knows what her status is, she is did we did receive her brief as an appellate.

>> we did the brief filed was filed by her as well as the two individuals. . 3 people >> on the brief we included her name we were working together. we were discussing and we thought best to include but again did not consider implications of --. i wanted make sure that everybody is on the same page.

the question is in fairness if the appellate wants her to testify during her time, should we allow that. we could. but not allow her to speak during public comment. >> that part is clear. she will not be a coappellate. the fairness, i think at this

point i'm happy to let you make the call based on the fact that we received the materials. and reviewed them. and i continuing is more a question of you know time and making sure you all are clear that -- similar no coappellate. no base i for this temperature it is a matter of how do you want to present your arguments this evening. like how do you want to a lot that time. >> great. we proceed with me. speaking for 7 minutes and karen can speak the 3. >> okay. >> great. >> thank you. thanks. >> thank you. >> can we get started? >> sure. when you are ready >> thank you everyone my pert partner on the phone. should th is regarding the construction of a roof deck on

your property and the property adjacent to our building on 557. weave were notified about this. a now days before the start of the construction. and with another neighbor with chris who we filed an appeal. and -- basically our occurrence -- 4 major ones one with privacy. other is with obstruction of light and views. and the third major concern is noise and safety and neighborhood character. we will go in details why we think they'll be impacted. i want to state thatment we want to be good neighbors. want our neighbors to be happy. we are like young families getting started we want them to be happy with when they are constructing. but our request is to be a bit more considerate to privacy and other restrictions of

considerations this the rest of us have. >> i paused your time >> thank you. >> okay. am so i think this is -- computer, please. this is the tech quality practical they mentioned sfgov.org mentions there would be technical problems alec can show it on zoom. >> yea. -- there is a technical issue with the laptop he will pull your presentation on zoom and he can -- guide it tell him when

youment the next page. >> all right. >> i don't know if you will be. >> we will take a 5 minute recess while the technical people come out i welcome back to the november meeting of the board of appealless. we are resumg item number 5. property 5 pen wisconsin street. and the appellate is going to begin her presentation we are

restarting her time we had technical issues. welcome and thank you for dwrur patience. go ahead. >> thank you. >> can we get the computer [inaudible]. on zoom. this is the property this we are talking about. 559 the unist in blue. is where we live. 561 is my neighbor and 5 pen where the roof deck is being constructed zoechl 3 concerns. privacy. talk about privacy the neighborhood character and safety and noise. we go in to all of those. i paused your time. thank you. >> according to the section of san francisco planning code we states that [inaudible] designed

to provide minimum acinstruction. and we like to keep this reference as we go through the, pictures. our concern primary and big major concern is privacy. the proposed deck is 6 feet away from our windows and doors. we are makeing a joint presentation we presentsd that as a reference the bedroom window and upon of karen's unit this is the view of the deck in karen's unit. in is the view from inside in karen's unit. when wh you see is our unit this . is balcony and our living and kitchen areas are year. deck starts here but as you see extends quite into the space and irrelevant close to our building. we have been ail to hear noise. from people upstairs. and then it provides a line direct line of sight in our

living room and kitchen as limp >> i will let karen speak to this i will speak and karen to this the primary occurrence >> another big concern is neighborhood impact in neighborhoods like ours in potrero hill, views are like a prime attraction for people to purchase in this area. and roof top decks are not common. most out door space are located either at the lower level or ground level. and proposed deck is eli haved height does not have proper setbacks and. speak in the microphone >> it disrupts the of established character. this is a picture of the top expect it you see 91 of the unit vs a roof top deck than i have a backyard or a rear deck.

>> the other concern. is noise and safety. while the intentions in of the experience are respectful once an officer deck of this size is constructed tell be active low use exclude noise from decks in dense neighborhood system unavoidable this will be sound top carry in neighboring properties. we already started experiencing some of this stuff. and i know that the spanltds said we can roach out and they will respect typeset which i appreciate but then that puts ounous on husband every time there is a noise concern. we want all of us to be respectful and mind pistol of the neighbor's privacy and noise. the lot is narrow and it is a narrow lot temperature attached our unit and the deck sitos top

of it and so again its the closeness is what also concerns us. can >> i will let karen speak. i'd like to get to the opgdzp options we want our neighbors to enjoy their property we be long-term neighbors andment you to coexist and like our spaces. our suggestions are as follows. this is a view of their backyard. and there used to be a rear deck toned down and they have an air b & b unit or a unit requested for short term rental has its own out door space. request is to repurpose this existing oust door space and iesz use that as a soushsz of like being outside. and then you can construct a roar deck at the lower level if

possible. i understand that there are restrictions but it can still be accommodateed build a rear deck at the lower level and then if -- the third option this is not something this we -- prefer but we understand that alost construction for the deck has been done. am the stair case has been built. if you need follow you00 autosponsorsment a deck we request thome move it to the back of the building. and clear out the space between the windows and the bedroom windows and our doors make it smaller. and that they get the out door space down and the small are deck up them is enough space it does not follow concern busy neighborhood look that is something we were able to

compromise on and we do think that we do think that -- noise and safety is like going to be an issue for us are the roof top deck. those are when we propose. >> that's all we have. >> thank you. i don't see questions. you can be seated and we'll hear from the permit holders. >> understands the neighbor's concerns and comments and i do appreciate their comments that they want to have a long lasting

neighborly relationship with us. that's something that i would like to have as well. we see ourselves this n this house for long-term it is noted a come in and dot roof deck and g. so -- glad to hear that. one thing i would say is you know -- we -- went for this permit and did not consult the neighbors at the start. tiffany and i regret that. we wish we did and if future permits come on board that is something we will do. everthink it address the items y. our property 55 upon 7 wisconsin is 20 foot wide. and so that means we have a 5 foot setback with our property and neighboring property. it restrict what is we can do in terms of layout and in terms of

decks. and we also have an adu at the back an existing structure of 551 wisconsin. nowtive 92 and i are live thering and init happened to rent it. . of the that be a long-term aren't not air b & b >> because of the rear deck it make its hard to do anything in the backyard i know the picture there shows an existing deck. that desks more in access to the back we assume was there prior to the adu. it had a 5 by 5 or landing. and it was not feasible for equalization or hiking out, et cetera. it was full of dry rot part of the reason it was taken down. in terms of pry privacy. we have met with the neighbors.

last week. to discuss the privacy concerns and how we help with friacy screens. for karen's property we suggested may be a sort of one way film on the window on the bottom third. her system 5 foot boost deck. we can't see directly in, our line of site is through the roof. our suggestion there was of on the bottom quarter or third of the window we have a privacy screen that means karen has a perfect view of the city which we allment. but can't see us and we can't see her. i want to address the light and views in terms of views we will not obstruct any of that. our deck will be on the level of

the roof. tell be us stand thering. because karen's window starts 5 foot above us and see out over our head. we have no instengz of putting a structure up. we looked at doing a -- stairs or penalty house and we removed that. because of the neighbors, so, although they may have not seen that we -- put in [inaudible] for them, we did in. terms of light the light starts behind 559. and come around. we are not obstrunging daylight or sunlight in their property. and -- you know upon anything we got a shadow from them we can't change that. and in terms of noise, i think as she said we suggested if there is noise send a text and we'll stop us.

now we near construction. always and we are trying our fwoeft get done as soon as we can to move november and stop the disruption for everyone. in terms of neighborhood character. the deck is not visible from the street. we had a -- upon a view perspective done by our engineer. and showing that it is not visible from the street. and when you stands in that back roof, you look around every property has a deck. and yes it may not be a roof deck. there is from line of site about 4 roof decks across the street you can see. every property discipline have a deck at the rear of the property. because we are restricted and can't do that the at rear of the property we are left with the one avenue of the roof.

so. i don't have anything additional to add at that time. but if you have questions happy to take them. >> thank you. we have questions from commissioner swig and vice president trasvina. >> thank you, and i respect your sense of upon fairness and respect for your neighbors. do you have plans that we can go over together? yes. >> what i'm you know when we look at pictures of construction, and -- layouts. the construction going on now and layout we don't get a full sense. what will be around this thick. is the fencing soland i had block light. and this begs questions about setbacks and -- all the things that and the things that were

brought up by the appellate. can -- and -- so can you -- run through the plans with us. and -- show us exactly how that deck is going sit. now you know showed a photo and says the deck is under construction. that is trueoir base. if we denied or upheld the appeal that the basis for the deck will turn to asphalt. but it is in the tell turn to the basis of the deck. now what we see is the prep for that >> but can you run us tluch and.

this ask thes evenlz our property well is a walk way before the niche's property begins. >> there are setbacks from that neighbor. appellate neighbor? that is the appellate. >> so there is a setback of sick feet >> that's correct. so on that property line, can you please show us where the that -- their window is which will in the be -- fully obscured

or it is really their one of their objections about privacy and also light that is the bottom of the screen now. so, what will happen there? because obviously, that is not going to be a way to get finished because i don't think the dbi will let you have a curb high finished to your deck. how do you anticipate finishing deck and what type of fence are you anticipating? is there going to able setback with the property line and gives help on that, please? >> yea. to upon point out. and -- i'm working on this side of the property. >> got it. and i can think i can work.

thank you. so this window here is karen's window. which is the appellate. and appellate upper attentives or owner. and she is the karen has the public comment in at the moment and the appellate's window is down here. so -- if you see the orange line? drawn here. going across that is where our hand rail will be. will we are open to do privacy screen that will act as our hand rail. so let's say when you are on the deck you don't have a view into the neighbor's property. and then similarly than i don't have a view into our deck. i think it works both base. i want to stress you know we did not extend the deck further you know we could have extend

today -- down further so it was closer to the neighbors. we chose not to do that in respect of the neighbors. i think in terms of at the back we are probably in the back as much as we can go. we are up against the back of the property. you know again, i think the privacy screen would [inaudible]. >> and then from that point the deck -- the back end of the deck is the orange line which would extend to the other side of the property line >> that's correct >> okay. >> and what type of is that going to be a what kind of fencing is that going to be. we have not made a final decision on what that will be i

know what the basis will have a steel hand rail for strength and support well is a 25 foot drop but we are open it suggestions and work width neighboros what that would look like. >> okay. >> what i like, i'm going to has mr. birmingham opine on preferred solutions with dbi from safety and security stand point according to not your opinion but the statutes. and compliance. and -- we can get a sense of what that fence may have to be. i don't know.

clearly has to be a fence, which is a letser issue go along the property line extending to the end of your building the backside of the deck? >> that's correct. >> you have noted determined that. >> no. >> okay >> i do feel like -- putting a priise screen above 6 feet would not be allowable. kevin can speak on that further. but because the karen's window is raise today is that's right put a screen on our side and block the view. >> and dbi will give us a brief whatting that comprehend sf can't be and what materials are recommend. what -- tomorrows are against the rules and so we can help you both find resolution on this. commissioner trasvina? >> thank you, a couple of quick

questions. as i understand it you had other ideas for this improvement? and this represents a compromise? >> could is that did i understand this correctly yoochl that's correct when we looked at the design for the deck we looked at 3 opgdzs for the stair case or access to the deck. the first was to do a penthouse. the second was to do an internal stair case. and then the third was to do the retractible sky light. the penthouse provided more obstruction for neighbors and more disturbance to the neighborhood we ruled that out sdpchlt internal stair case was upon nightmare at the bottom to meet code and waterproofing issue the restrakt evertractable sky light was preferred in the end. it was more expense others it creates the least grievances for

everyone. >> so the option you selected is more cost low to you than other things you could have done. >> that's correct >> if you would'd could pull up the first photo you had on the screen? the one with the orange line on the roof. >> >> that one. thank you. can you clarify can the deck we are talking about where the black lines are? or -- were the orange line is going to be the fence, correct? that's correct. >> so is the deck beyond that or is the deck closer to the front of picture? >> the deck will be -- where you arech >> yea >> great >> so then the issue about -- privacy is -- and can you point out the appellate's window?

>> jury room that's this window here and this one here >> so -- what is oorm00 what is going to beom your blat is -- purpose or function of the area that is beyond the orange line? closer to the appellate's window yoochl that is going to be roof. >> roof >> yes >> inaccessible roof. >> so when we are talking about the appellate's privacy, we are talking about the deck which is over here and the windows that are further down? >> that's correct yoochl thank you. >> okay. thank you i don't see further questions can you be seated. we will hear from planning

department. >> good evening president lopez and commissioners corey teague za for planning department. i don't have too nouch add a lot has been covered. but this is for a permit issued for 55 pen wisconsin street that is owned rh2. there are two existing dwellings on the front home and the rear cottage. because of this rear cottage well is limited open space and rear yard on the site. the subject building permit adds a modest roof deck 165 square feet and a roof hatch. the proposed deck you saw will be setback 6 feet from the side property line. it was filed, approved and issued over the counter on

september 13th of this year. and the permit did not require neighborhood notification and it was compliant with the planning code. can in the context of the proposal. it was reviewed and reviewed genetics design guideline miss this case is a common context an existing two story building not proposing to add a third store which he is common and could have happened here and adding a small deck above that second story. if there had been a third story for context and there was an adjacent light well that will be 3 foot matching light well to give context to the 6 foot setback that is provided here. and then just there are a couple upon references made to call out. and privacy the big concern raised by appellates and also

there have been references to private views and those are not protected by planning or residential design guideline. there was a troefrns planning code 136 and about light and air and protections there. to be clear that provision of 136 was about steep sloping rear yards decks in the roar yard and steep slope it is a different condition that is referencing when we are allowing those in the required reeshiard. we are talking about a roof deck in the permitted building area on the lot. again to conclude, we get the issues a lot. privacy is an issue. dense city and try to do things and balance things out on the whole the project is consistent with the planning code and consistent with the residential

design guidelines. and it was employees appropriate low approved by planning. i'm available for questions you may have. >> thank you. president lopez. >> thank you for your guidance. the appellate had testimony about the set bhak not being appropriate and proper. so can you speak to that with the 6 foot setback what is your view? >> the typical requirement is not codified it is a guideline. is for roof deck when is you have ajaysancey to be in the situations or if there is a jaysancey to other areas that are you nots blinds walls. the typical guideline is 5 if he felt >> for a setback. if they added a floor which you

are saying00 althoughed be in play at the property that is with respect upon the -- additional setback would be required >> add another floor they done what to the property line. am what the residential design guidelines call for if there is a build with a light well they are 3 feet sdpeechl can vary in depth. weave asked for matching light wells to a degree if you have a large light well on the neighboring we don't require full matching but typically 3 foot sdpoup a 75% matching up to a mack dimension this . is not that case. the neighboring building does not have a light has an inset at the lower level.

vice president trasvina >> thank you for your presentation. you acknowledged the privacy issue is a big issue the appellate has described her privacy concerns over this. this is how is privacy factored in when the person who's privacy is at issue is not part of the process? >> sure, we had some of these come up before it is a bit of i balancing act. when we look at these in terms of the specific context of the existing property and adjacent properties. we are looking if there are unique and direct issues being created.

typically when we have situations like this you are in the area you have immediately side situations opposed looking in the rear. of people's homes or other unique scenario. these are once where those side interior windows are not the primary windows, they have a front or rear or both set of windows. it is not like the only window access. but this types of situation a common situation and how we look in a balanced perspective this is a common perspective where we don't ask for changes beyond like in this situation a 6 foot setback we ask for a 5 foot setback. we would not determined that it was unusual privacy situation in the city what required more design.

>> would the person reviewing it over of the counter on your staff know that those windows were there are? sore not? >> they were shown the plans we require side elevations that show openings not guilty buildings those are on the plans. we have those on the plans. in them case, my guess would have been typical because it has a 6 foot setback and begin off setting depth. we would not have been practice to ask for more information or go further. >> balancing is generic if this is the situation we would say yes or no. because of the set become or the distance or because in this neighborhood we know generally what they are like. rather than hearing from an individual the person saying this is my privacy concern. may be i'm overly concerned.

am that part you would know or the department would know tuesday be look athit this is how we balance >> correct there is not a requirement in planning no policies by the department. >> no further questions we will hear from dbi.

>> good evening. again, not much to add-on this point i would like to reiterate commissioner swig this is a property line window put this -- it has no rights. at this point. the permit holders could ask for them to close it and up lose a view. of but -- you know i'm not sure if they are aware there is fence on the property line that should not be there not sure when are it happened i think before they bout the property the deck is setback a ways and below their window. the right now the railing in the draw suggest horizontal wire railing to speak to your point it has to with stand 200 pound per inch no more than 4 inches apart it is standards and minimum 42 inches high it they go want to go higher anything over 6

foot go back through review. we did come across this they could put plant figure they wanted help with "power for life"acy. stipulate is a small deck at the back of the lot. i'm not sure what else the wire railing. you know it seems like a modest deck for me setback and 6 foot away and is upon below the neighboring window. and the lower unit has a view in their kitchen. so -- you know privacy guess both ways. i'm not sure what if you have other questions? >> thank you. >> commissioner swig. >> can you -- thank you for this summary and i appreciate that. and the fact that a couple weeks ago we said put plantings had in and help the situation.

can you suggest sat in on my god i can't count amount of deck this is we discussed. and i heard, you know just purpose of informing the appellate not to scare the appellate but you know -- we heard, listen, tough luck. put curtains up. i think like00 autoworse response i heard in my life. cold, heartless but by the wachl can you cure this and put curtains up and that's the response that i heard from from people on the other side including you know commissioners going yep that the only resolution. aside from the crass comment which is put curtains up.

wham can the -- we have a nice seems like a nice gentlemen. manner abopaque glass on the lower window? is it mralgds? are are aring what are the affordable -- efficient, and solutions as far as what he put

in -- below >> yea. i mean they can go with the materials you need an opaque panel. we have to run it by there are requirements as far as bird protection fly nothing it and stuff. but for the upper window. if you go to a point you are blocking the privacy and the view there is is a balancing act but -- you know definitely as far as are limiting the vow in the lower unit you can put more of a solid railing there or opaque panel it is something they can combhup a couple of options and discuss back and forth. right now it is approved for a wires transparent and let's in a lot of light t. is not obtrusive. so. and the zig-zag is in the that much it is to walk off of the deck. i mean -- we would be open top

whatever they want to discuss. they seem to be neighborly and hopeful low they can come to an agreement. the wire. here is the good new citizen wire allows a lot of light the bad news the wires going to novelty help with privacy in the lower unit. there is a solution to is that which is putting in an opaque planting. ownership a planting. the bad news with that is if if worried about views which are not protected, then they will risk this they will lose the view. >> and so you can -- may i -- effectively -- summarize your testimonies by saying that -- -- it is possible for -- if we --

denied the appeal can left it in there hands as neighbors they can best open top doing -- yes. anything. this they combhup in being neighborly as long as it meets code yoochl what about running down i'm focusod that which the property owner -- how it zig-zaged. what about the property line it is -- is that the same rules? >> pretty much. >> let me see. yea they are showing a wire railing all the way. can you put that as a sottid panel temperature is below their window. >> you know you can extend it up like i say anything over 6

foot would require the review. it takes obviously got abanchored better t. is higher. >> it does not seem to be the contention. >> no temperature seems to be the zig-zag part and the lower window. that is only to exit off the deck and down in the roof t. is in the like they will be standing out on that zig-zag much i would not think. >> right. >> other thoughts. >> >> that's the other piece we like to bring up on this -- panel. is that this could be being be a full expansion and another store oat building and they are entitled to do this. it is a modest deck. >> it is modest construction and than i have the right to add another floor and really do damage

>> upon damage in the eyes of the appellate. thanks. >> thank you. no further questions. we are moving to public comment. if anyone in the room would like comment approach the microphone you have 3 minutes. >> welcome >> am hi. i'm karen. i am the owner of 561 wisconsin street. we showed below the owner and resident of the upper unit is it okay -- the computer. i wanted it show just00 auto -- extent of the privacy violations that this roof deck would have on my property. this is upon a photo i took from the outside of my bedroom window. you see the bedroom is front and

center and see like the master bathroom in the back. a huge violation of my privacy in the most sensitive area of my home. the mast are bathroom and bedroom. of a one bedroom apartment this . is showing the proximity. i,0006 feet they are within the required setback limit, 6 feet i think we are more than 6 feet apart now. i think it is it is not adequate in this case because it is a bathroom window. and providing the privacy i believe i is my right. and you see how close they are in this photo. and -- you stheen photo a thousand timeis will not go to detail there. we did have a couple meetings to discuss my privacy occurrence. and -- they did suggest that i

install window films. and i don't believe this is an add way solution. there are two types of films one is frosted which would block my view and light. and the second one is a one way like mirror film i don't know if this is legal but that only effective during the daytime that is not effective at night. i don't believe this could adequate low solve my privacy occurrence. and then my second concern is blocking the views. and this is the view i have outside of my window. you see the skyline and why i bought the apartment to wake and up go to swleep this view. so, while i do acknowledge the deck is low sxerld not completely disrupt the views, it

is in the direct line of site to the city skyline and i permit holders will have furniture and lighting and that would disrupt that. this is -- i don't know how they will decorate this is my imagined what that might look like. you see how the view is disrupted by furniture and lighting. and then finally i think this does have a big impact on property value this is a photo taken >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. thank you. >> is there any other public comment? are you architect? you can not comment you are related to the party. >> thank you. >> okay. so is there public comment on zoom? i don't see we will move on to

rebuttal and hear from the appellate. i like to address a few things i heard one thing. >> sfeek in the microspoken. hand rail, piappreciate that the wire hand rail will like get the protection but if you replaced with opaque rail it might address the privacy person that will block the light that is a primary source of light for our living room and we. and kitchen. and testimony is not true it is a second army window it is an important window we have the dining area next to that. other thing is while the rail suggest not too high and the rest the roof can be easy access. within can say we will notarc sesz the other part of the roof. i think you continue is easy to jump over that railing and go to the the rest of the roof that is

a concern for us. . the -- lower view has a view in the kitchen is what was mentioned. like our -- area has a view in the kitchen. we have a balcony and it is high. and we have reflective windows we don't have a great view to the kitchen. and the zig-zag going to be an entrance to the deck is close to the our window and our balcony and again like the rail suggest not high enough. can be easily jumped off there the roof can be accessed. so, i think it sounds great we thanking there will be noise, a lot of people that come up to the officer. and we as neighbors would have to constant low message and text and say keep it dhun it is a situation

we want to avoid to maintain good neighborly relations in the future >> thank you. >> thank you. >> we'll hear from the permit holder. >> you have will floe minutes. >> okay. >> hello >> tiffany tran. if you want to share the time. >> >> i'm tiffany transplant permit hold are. i do just want to inform the board that the intended use of the deck and why we design today was really for me to minimum use. you know i just like to recommend i like to work at home sometime its is remote is for me to step out.

you know we don't plan to have large social gatherings zee not thus far. and you know i don't want the ownous to be on neighbors to contact us if we cause an issue. if we plan for a gatheringil notify them. especially i know they w from home. you know i'm trying my best to be considerate and especially during the construction and design. did my best my due diligence, that's why i worked with engineers and the departments and you know i might have missed which is a large learning lesson to notify them. and may be get occurrence of when we intend to do with the property. >> just learning lesson on my end and appreciate active conversations today i learned a lot. and may be we take this back and see how else we can better

resolve and improve the situation for all of us. we have are in the thick of the construction and would like to just reach the end result soon and hopeful low find a way to apeez the neighbors through this. >> thank you. >> pause the time. okay. go ahead you'd have a minute and 20 seconds >> wanted introduce myself. much i was going to say has been said. but this is the young couple this came to get open space on their lot as we heard there is no open space on the lot. it is minimal. and p there is an adu not a lot of santa fes for growing family. the deck as mr. birmingham mentioned could have been bigger 3 timeless the size and approved by planning and dbi.

>> you know the neighbors the appellates they have large decks off the back of their building that is not practical in our case if we were to do that this would encroach on the adu. . light and air requirement there is it is not guilty a practical solution. we discussed different ways to improve live transparency and give them privacy. will it is difficult illegal property line window they are worry body privacy and views coming through. -- but that is all i wanted say and happy to answer questions. >> thank you. >> commissioner swig. >> sure. >> it was i want to put more discussion we will have in context. setting the stage for our discussion and as much as i will

ask you a question. everybody not many people are correspond with 30 years from now. and -- we have to be here. it is in the that mrs. tran -- what her behavior is i believe her. but when mrs. tran sells the property she will steal to somebody may say roof deck, per! right. and that's really one of the occurrence that we have to have. is looking forward to the future what we do today it statistic. so, in consideration of the testimony we heard today, you know views are not protect period. throw that out. slight a consideration. privacy is a consideration. do you have any i congress i'm

not -- complaining the way that you designed this deck. but i hope you are getting empathy with when we have to do with looking at the future. is there any further setback and further alteration with sthachl and also treatment regards to the fencing protective fence figure. you might immediately see an alternative that might be suggested tonight. i would say we took that out those option in consideration to begin with. we are cest back 6 free throw that neighbor already insure athlete foot more than code require a foot more than planning recommends. so upon that is a gap between the two buildings it is half the width. i know you suggested opaque

glass. >> they took consideration already. >> thank you. anything you say is fine. i always like to investigate.

i'm investigating whether you have thoughts begin you have been on that roof about -- more than a dozens. thank you. >> thank you, you can be seated. >> hear from the planning department. anything further from dbi? >> okay. commissioner this is matter is submitted. >> thanks. we will start deliberations with vice president trasvina. >> thank you, president lopez and i want to thank all of the participates in this hearing from the city, wisconsin street to really have a good thorough discussion what is going on and the expectations and considerations. of other people i don't believe we can provide relief sought here. my concern is more in terms of

how the process regards to privacy the ownership of the privacy is not part of the process until they file an appeal. that is i think that's inadequate. i know the city has ways in which to evaluate it and look at it on paper. get a general sense through experience and through knowledge. of doing these things. but the if -- if we are talking about privacy it is incomplete without an expression or of the opportunity for someone's privacy is affected. and it is -- to be part of the process. mrs. wong showing of the photograph of inside her bedroom and bathroom i think that is very significant problem.

but it is in the something we can really handle from this level. i'm heartened by what i see is both on the record as work that both all the neighbors have done on try to look at possibilities and at evers and discard some. go to alternatives more expensive for them and the other hand in general. a sense i believe of working together. and i thank you is unfortunately this is the only place this can occur. >> and commissioner intig is right that works as long as -- the neighbors are the neighbors. when somebody moves we have no idea who will live there in the next 10 or 20 years that is a defect in our over all process. but as for this, this permit before us, i believe it was

properly granted by also i i would -- not approve the appeal but i also think everyone here can heart expectations of this board that we hear you when you say you are willing to talk and community and find more ways to accommodate your neighbor's valid concerns. >> my turn? >> i echo commissioner trasvina. you know it really is something when i'm sensitive to is -- first, i want top say, thank you for being so civil to each other. i mean we are here week after week and we see a lot of venom. and it really makes us upset. upset for the appellate and for the permit holder because you

all live next to each other. i normally give the spoech to remind you you live next to each other you go home and live next to each other. thank you for being so civil. a pleasure and make its a great pleasure for us not that we can't here but want to point it out t. is nice. >> we are sympathetic about all these situations because we see them time and time again. and -- we have to -- be kinds as we can be. well is no -- -- the design of this deck is compliant temperature is up to a standard. may be you all can -- work together. to figure out how you can best

find a solution to protect more of the privacy issues. at this point it is out of our handses to protect the appellate. any further than suggesting that. because the permit holder is compliant. i don't like fear tactics and don't mean to make the appellate uncomfortable but you did hear that -- you have a property line window and those are not protected. you also heard that are speak of the future that the next owner could come in and add a floor to this house instead of just a deck. and then you are really going to be upset but they can do it. that's would be really tragic for you all. but in this dhas is like this is

a simple deck temperature is compliant special going to cause you some disruption. we are sorry and i'm sure that -- the appellate the permit hold cert sympathet toik your ploy this is good as a job and consider with great consideration offered by the permit holdtory neighbor that gets their upon job done and affects the permit holder. as little as possible there are a little intrusions of privacy. i don't see how we can uphold the nel this case. >> i will echo that and echo,

the shorthand version i calendar say to the appellate is -- you know could have been worse and you know -- be thank of that you have -- reasonable thoughtful, neighbors here. we don't see thoughtful neighbors in our wednesday night meetings. i echo that -- statement of -- for the civility in this case it guess back to that principle that views you know are not protected when woe buy a property there is no guarantee it will stay the same that the neighbor's properties will stay the same forever. or for a year or two. and the city is dynamic. you know it is a positive thing that homes are improved, units

addd and we have dynamic, thriving and growing city. and this is one aspect of this and i think this i would echo that you know we will not gift relief it looks like this evening. but i would echo -- the importance of continuing on this path of being neighborly for the permit holders and sounds like have you every intention of doing so it is important to continue you know i heard that, hey we wish we valid spoen spoke tone them earlier. i think you are in a good place to continue with those efforts now. >> there will come a time when the deck is done and construction is over. you still have to cross path when you check the sxhal move the car every couple days, so that is when we are trying to preserve for everyone on the

block. >> a motion it deny the appeal on base the permit was properly issued >> we have a motion on the basis it was properly issued president lopez. >> aye >> vice president trasvina >> aye. the appeal is denied. >> we are adjourned. thank you, everybody.

>> my name is lauren. i am the owner and founder of farm branch and we are here at farm branch on [indiscernible] third street, on the corner of third and bryant. we started in 2020, so we are a pandemic baby. all the [indiscernible] expresso selection and [indiscernible] full scale brunch thursday through saturday and catering. we do custom catering and events every day of the week and then we serve all the walk-in as well. we became known for our cookies and our [indiscernible] the chipper is a chocolate chip cookie, but it also has a expresso and

these chocolate cripies which adds texture. that was the cookie the food network named one of the most iconic cookies enthe u.s. which is cool. we take customer service and the overall customer experience so important. we are called the hidden gem every day. people say we didants know you existed. we are proud of what we built and what we are doing and we just are really i think excited for people to find us and see how special we are. >> the height of my addiction i was homeless. i was isolatesed from my family. i had lost everything. my spirit was completely

broken. methadone gave me my recovery. it gave me my life back. the impacted relationships with my family in the most mir aculous way. i'm living proof that trea [music] hi, my maim is judy seeber and owner and bier for emily joubert my-my husband and i own the store together and i started 20 years ago. my husband always thought we should open more doors, and we had two middle school age children and were

waiting for them to get older. once they left for college we opened more doors andf is was a natural for me because my grand mother raised my mom in the city on california. emily joubert is my mother's mother and when i original bought the store in woodside it was named in any event and wanted to make it more personal so my inspiration for my whole life has been by grand mother. she was really into fashion and sewing and cooking and all things that make a home and i love the thought my grand mother strolled up and down the street and i feel it is perfect location for the store with her namesake and i want to be a source of inspirational things and something convenient for the neighbors. and the community at large. in the neighborhood i like to think of it as a wonderful place that if

you need a gift we have a lot of hostess gifts. if you need table pillows. we have everything for the home. it is like a mini-general store. i don't know there is a lot of home and garden stores in the area. i know there is dedicated garden stores rchlt what sets me apart i think is just my dedication to doing things that i think my grand mother would love what inspires me and i find in her home if she were alive today and things again, that make a house a home. i take great pride in really discovering and sourcing things that you can't easily find at the store down the street. we want to welcome everyone in the neighborhood and in the city and in the greater bay area to come and discover

emily joubert. [music] >> >> (indiscernible) faces transformed san francisco street and sidewalks. local business communities are more resilient and our neighborhood centers on more vibrant ask lively. sidewalks and parking lanes can be used for outdoor seating, dining, merchandising and other community activities. we're counting on operators of shared spaces to ensure their sites are accessible for all and safe. hello, san francisco. i love it when i can cross the street in our beauty city and not worry whether car can see me and i want me and my grandma to be

safe when we do. we all want to be safe. that's why our city is making sure curb areas near street corners are clear of parked cars and any other structures, so that people driving vehicles, people walking, and people biking can all see each other at the intersection. if cars are parked which are too close to the crosswalk, drivers can't see who is about to cross the street. it's a proven way to prevent traffic crashes. which have way too much crashes and fatalities in our city. these updates to the shared spaces program will help to ensure safety and accessibility for everyone so we can all enjoy these public spaces. more information is available at sf dot gov slash shared

warm, wet friday recording in progress. president joaquin torres