mr. winslow, how should we word it? >> that's a great idea, but the criteria, how would we know when the parties have mutually arrived at an agreement? in other words, at what point do we decide to come back and say we're at an impasse, the project sponsor has decided not to change or modify things or the demands of the d.r. requester -- >> commissioner richards: sure. maybe a continuance is in order. obviously, we've had miss sciuto come up and say look at these buildings in the back. it's kind of a stage or theater with back lighting. maybe a continuance for a week while you guys sit down and talk and come back, and hopefully we have a consent in two weeks, and that's it, would work. >> president hillis: commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: to continue it only meant for us to have a clearer understanding of what is really -- of what's going on here. i'm not saying where we will be not supporting the project. i have to do equal justice to both of them. however, when i examine it at home, i need to have informatio

his ph just a question for mr winslow.'s what we have in the pocket of the revised project where they got rid of some windows? >> yes. >> commissioner richards: oh, k. is there a second. >> president hillis: their wives. >> clerk: if there is nothing further, there is a motion that has been seconded to not take d.r. and approve the project as proposed. [roll call] so moved. that motion passes unanimously 7 -0. that will place us in item ten. please note on april 19th, 2018, after hearing and closing public comment, you continued this matter where it was subsequently continued again to today by a vote of 7-0. as this is the second time you're hearing this matter, commissioners, commission president to list, what do you want to place the timing at? typically we do three and one. >> president hillis: it is a d.r.? let's do three and one. >> clerk: very good. the project sponsor and d.r. requesters will receive three minutes. public comment will be limited to one minute. >> president hillis: we can do a one minute rebuttal. >>

mr. winslow for a second. i would like for you to use the word cruiseship effect as something we don't want. it's a brilliant word. >> you want me to say cruiseship on the record? >> commissioner moore: it's something we don't want. cruiseship effect hits the nail on the head with things we've been discussing lately. there are people that want a deck in the front, a deck in the back, a deck on top, and here and there and everywhere. that's the cruiseship effect. when you have a situation with front deck and rear deck, it's architectural massing, which i would like to be put into the discussion. the idea of private roof decks when there is a common roof deck proposed because it's one of the largest objections that we've seen. i don't see that yet as part of the discussion. >> we were taking baby steps. we know it's part of a larger discussion in larger units when there's a proliferation of larger roof decks and that issue. we wanted to start where we could and build off that. it's in our vision in the next year

>> commissioner richards: question, mr winslow. can i ask and try to understand this better.on page 27, there is a brief story addition and says it a three-story addition into a real regard to the scale of the surrounding buildings. when i look at this, it reads exactly like what this diagram here. is this a three-story building? >> by building code definition, it is a three-story building because of the downslope. from the street it is a -- it is a two-story building. existing it is a one-story building. if you look at the photographs, these are modest tones. >> president hillis: the home on the other side extends out. >> commissioner richards: in response to the guideline illustration, that is one of -- an illustration indicating an intent. the way we applied it in catching our mistake after we sent it out was what would be the proper relief to the adjacent neighbor. with respect to shadow, light, and enjoyment of the open space. visual access from the window. that 5-foot setback, as well as pulling the rear wall of the originally proposed building further inward was in my

mr. winslow on friday, that it's far away to follow commission requirements to the extent that it does provide

mr. winslow on friday, that it's far away to follow commission requirements to the extent that it does provide us 3-d, which makes it almost impossible to understand particularly even in the existing propose does site plan. the site conditions with described in a manner that they are basically hardly readable, so my suggestion would be that we continue this project. that one, we encourage the two parties to talk to each other and understand the constraints each of them has. it's not just one having constraints, but the other one does, too.

mr. winslow on friday, that it's far away to follow commission requirements to the extent that it does provide us 3-d, which makes it almost impossible to understand particularly even in the existing propose does site plan. the site conditions with described in a manner that they

i sent an e-mail to mr winslow and two may. there is a copy of it for the record. just want -- my take on these roof decks is that it is to increase the value when you sell it. and it adds to the cost of housing. i think that the overarching things should be that if there is enough open space to meet the open space requirement in the yard or on lower decks, which i think should not be categorized as roof decks, even though they may be on the roof, they are a deck off of a living space. a roof deck is a unique thing. i first became tuned into roof decks -- you didn't even start my clock. >> sorry. >> get to the overhead, please. this is down the street from me. originally i would put a fourth floor up there and the neighbors bought it. we came here. the compromise -- this was four years ago. i was sitting in the bath and i nearly had a conniption went a commissioner said, it would be a really great view from up there. we ought to allow a roof deck. i thought, no one is entitled to a view. it says that in the rdg and i thought why are they getting a view for the roof