mr. kevlin and mr. kanter put fourth, i would also like to have something addressed to the lot line unless my fellow commissioners say let it ride and let someone else kick the can and let someone else deal with it later. >> i'm somewhat in agreement with you, vice press, i would grant the appeal and subject to adopting the revised plans that have just been entered, right and that i don't have a problem if you want to condition it that the bay gets restored first. i don't think we need to address the lot line issue, again. clear ownership is with the owner and they can't sell it without it being resolved nor can they finish their permit without that issue being resolved. >> you are the residential real estate on the panel so i would defer to you but i wanted to bring it up. let's hear from the rest of the group to see if they agree with you and i? >> that sounds fine for my fellow commissioners? >> i'd like to hear a motion? >> i will make a motion to grant the appeal subject to the revised plans or sub

mr. kevlin and mr. kanter put fourth, i would also like to have something addressed to the lot line unless my fellow commissioners say let it ride and let someone else kick the can and let someone else deal with it later. >> i'm somewhat in agreement with you, vice press, i would grant the appeal and subject to adopting the revised plans that have just been entered, right and that i don't have a problem if you want to condition it that the bay gets restored first. i don't think we need to address the lot line issue, again. clear ownership is with the owner and they can't sell it without it being resolved nor can they finish their permit without that issue being resolved. >> you are the residential real estate on the panel so i would defer to you but i wanted to bring it up. let's hear from the rest of the group to see if they agree with you and i? >> that sounds fine for my fellow commissioners? >> i'd like to hear a motion? >> i will make a motion to grant the appeal subject to the revised plans or sub

mr. kevlin said there were meetings yet it was a clear complaint from one of the appellants that any outreach was greeted with silence. can you tell me about that? you know, you appear in front of us at least once a month if not twice a month and this is a regular comment from appellants. can you characterize the behavior of your client other than the fact they went through what would be typical meetings. can you comment, please, on how they might have responded to questions from individual neighbors? >> sure thing. thank you for the question, commissioner swig and i can bring up an outreach page of outreach if you would like to see it. i can characterize it for you. you know the project sponsor started with individual meetings and smaller group meetings. before you can file app application, as we know, you need to do the notice hearing. the big one with the neighborhood and that is what occurred. i wasn't with the project at the time so i'm kind of looking back myself. it appears pretty clear that after the large neighborhood meeting happened, that there wasn't really much direct conversatio