which is being reflect on the subject project they're arguing the lightwell excuse me. and you can see the skylights the appellant mentioned that require not adding a story because the adjacent property has a skylight you know we are looking at the main light through the front and rear of the building as well as through the lightwells at the side and this we on the project complies with the deadlines and plus the neighborhood character and code compliant i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> why does planning not allow them to demolish the old structure and build something that is code compliant. >> well, part of it is under the planning code section 317 to to demolish that we have that to where the dwelling are predicament. >> back in 2004. >> at a point i think we have section 317 and demolitions policies at this point maybe under the demolition policies i don't know all the details of the history of that from 10 years ago but maybe there were perhaps preservation concerns maybe. >> not a resource with no preservation concerns when was the last night are you finis

. >> we understand lightwell. >> the lightwell almost near is 2231 no 40 feet after the you know andhouse the owner want to extension - extend the property on the - you know, i feel i hope you understand what i'm saying okay maybe if you used the interpreter you'll explain it to her. >> the dr requester said that he has a lightwell but that lightwell is just in the center of the backyard of the subject properties center backyard and then it is a really near the subject property and effecting to my dr requesters property it is really near to any clients property he feels so effecting especially, when they are i mean deliver our space every time they speak in the house it effecting and since - it blocks their rivaprivacy. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and he concerned about the security of any properties because of the extension of the subjects property it makes i just assumed that some something hidden in my property and makes my rear property ounsecured. >> europe you'll have a two minute rebuttal at the end. >> explain to him his times is up he'll have two minutes tends. >> jus

which is being reflect on the subject project they're arguing the lightwell excuse me. and you can see the skylights the appellant mentioned that require not adding a story because the adjacent property has a skylight you know we are looking at the main light through the front and rear of the building as well as through the lightwells at the side and this we on the project complies with the deadlines and plus the neighborhood character and code compliant i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> why does planning not allow them to demolish the old structure and build something that is code compliant. >> well, part of it is under the planning code section 317 to to demolish that we have that to where the dwelling are predicament. >> back in 2004. >> at a point i think we have section 317 and demolitions policies at this point maybe under the demolition policies i don't know all the details of the history of that from 10 years ago but maybe there were perhaps preservation concerns maybe. >> not a resource with no preservation concerns when was the last night are you finis