inspector. >> mr. fung. the reference made by the project sponsor on the permit number, i'm looking at the application which was the number he referred to. but your permit numbers usually start with the year, doesn't it? >> yes, that's correct, yes. >> so the number that is on the application filled out by staff? >> it is, yes. >> and it's a tracking number versus a permit number? >> well, the application number should be 2017-2016, should start with, it should always be that. >> take a look at your package. it says permit is 1447832. >> could you repeat the number? >> 1447382. >> that's the receipt number. it's a permit number. but that's just for financial purposes. it doesn't show up anywhere in any of our tracking systems. our permit tracking system would give you the application number. that permit number, it's on everything, it's confusing a little bit. but you won't find that anywhere unless you have micro film copy of the permit but it's nowhere in our permit tracking system. it's more for our centra

. >> president hillis: thank you, mr. fung. next speaker, please. >> commissioners. thank you. my name is connolly reed. i'm a resident at baycrest. i'm a supporter of housing in the city, affordable housing, and despite that, i find myself to be surprised at the current plan at 430 main. i find it's a front to the community that's there, simply putting profits over health. the proposal, it's a brick or a wall as some others have mentioned, and it just, i think is intended to initially fill all the air space that it possibly can. if you look at it from the harrison street side, it will simply look like a prison wall. you know, in its history, the project project ignored the department's request for a two story design and has ignored the statements that you've heard here today. there are many other two tower concepts that pay respect to the community as they've developed. but most concerningly, i read the development report and saw that 430 main has been required to install merv-13 level filtration. interestingly, our home at bayview is 13 years old and home to many elderly and

mr. fung knows why was not at the meeting last time i was at the hague testifying against the president who has slaughtered 50,000 of his own people per day. almost 500,000 total. you know, i would like the overhead project on, please. >> if you cut that three feet, it will allow me to have a tunnel of light that i can use. a tunnel of light that i can use in the morning hour right there. that's what we're asking for, three feet. thank you for your consideration. >> the clerk: thank you. we can hear from the permit holder. >> good evening commissioners. i'm peter liang. i run the project and a neighbor. i live approximately half a block from the appellant, . we we've had a relationship as neighbors and done work for him and been in his house and have experience in both dwellings. i bring my role here primarily to orient you to the geographical and physical conditions of the site. i'm unclear as to how much you've seen documentation to the project so far so please chime in with any questions. i

fung: mr. tam, do you need more time? >> yeah, is that okay [off mic] >> president f. fung: okay. perhaps we should -- >> take a 5-minute break? >> president f. fung: take a 5-minute break. >> okay, welcome back to the regular meeting of the board of appeals. today is april 11th, 2018. and we were on item number 6 on the agenda. we were giving the appellant time to review the newly submitted plans. mr. tam, are you ready to address the board? >> president f. fung: please come forward. >> for the record my name is vincent tam, i'm the son of anthony tam who is unavailable to make it to today's meeting. so good evening, president fung, commissioners. for the 5-6 minutes i was able to review, i still want to fight for the rear because, as you can see, there's a large gap for the neighbors property right here. so the neighbor is free and clear of any air quality and privacy. but on this side, we have no privacy. but the neighbors do. i feel that's not fair to us and i feel like maybe they can do some revision and make it equally fair for both sides. judging from the space right here.

mr. teague. >> good evening, again, president funning and commissioners. -- president fung ad commissioners. the permit was originally filed in january of 2016. it was reviewed by our flex team in the department which reviews essentially all of the a.d.u. permits. it was required to receive an administrative zoning administrative waiver from density, open space, and parking. it did receive that in july of 2017. it also met all of the code requirements for the creation of new a.d.u.s in this situation. the a.d.u. allowed in buildings that have already four or more dwelling units and unlimited amount of new a.d.u.s as long as you meet all other code requirements. this is the existing building is a six dwelling building and they were allowed to propose more than one. it required the waivers for density because the maximum density is four dwelling units and the current building already contains six and open space and parking. there are also eviction controls for new a.d.u.s, if any, owner moves in within five years of the application or in the thought of eviction within the last 10 years of the

mr. teague? ok, so at this point commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> president fung: until we get an answer to that, i don't think it's fair for us to -- so we have not exhausted the issue as to whether every alternative location which is legal has been reviewed for the placement of this site in the interest of the neighborhood and the appellant. >> i'm willing to continue this, but i would like somebody here when we hear it again, from rec and park, my first choice is dana ketcham, but if not, someone in her department knowledgeable. >> i think it would be up to dpw to arrange the appropriate person that has specific answers to that question. continue to when? >> what does the calendar look like? >> how is may 9 looking? >> does may 9 work for both parties? i'm potentially not here. >> how about may 23? that's a little less crowded at this point. >> does that work? >> it works for the permit holder. how about the appellant? ok. >> so do we have a motion? >> i'll move to continue the item to may 23. >> president fung? >> aye. commissioner honda? aye commissioner wilson? aye. vice president

mr. badillo is a bad guy. we have spoken. it's just as a young owner he's not doing the things he needs to do to make sure his business is running properly. >> president fung: i think your time is up. we'll see the overhead and that's it. >> that's the invoice. you'll notice the charge. basically special equipment. i don't know what for. for picking up someone's car charges $460 to some person who is trying to get home to get breast milk for the baby and charging that fee seems extreme extremely exorbitant -- >> thank you. >> can you leave that on there. i have a question for the owner of the company. so, you just got before us and said your driver challenged them $125. >> that was the drop fee. >> on top of the other fee? >> no. it was miscommunicated. the drop fee is $125. >> so, can you look at the overhead and tell me if you recognize the signature of that driver? do you know who that driver is? >> there's no driver. that invoice is left blank. >> so, do you know who the driver was for that particular occasion? is he in front of us this evening? sir, you knew that this particular case was going to come up before us. you're going to tell me you don't kn