i am andrea tischler and i'm the one that owns the property adjacent at the rear on the rose street siden i first saw the proposal i was very much opposed to the project. just because of the massive size of the project. the variance calls for 25% of the rear lot you being used for yard and this considerably shortens that. also i was very opposed to the fact that part of the deck on the second about the gage, was going to -intruded into my light well could i have-there's an apartment building like four units and they're very very small apartments. under 500 ft.2. i've owned this property since 1970s. mid-70s. i had it for 40 years and my son lives there now. both he lives in the upstairs unit and my tenant lives in the downstairs could the downstairs particularly has a lot of mold problem. in the unit because there's no air circulation from a lattice and you might see from pictures in your packet there's a lattice and [inaudible] unfortunately, the deck the way was originally proposed was going to come into the light well and continue to contribute to poor air circulation. very bad light.