we will now hear from the permit holder, ms. hu. >> welcome. >> hello. i am evelyn hu and this is my husband. we are the recent owners of 24/7 2 vallejo street. we purchased the property two months ago. there is a whole history of issues of the building currently cleaned up. we are still in the process of cleaning up some of those things. i wanted to address a couple of things that just came up an hour before this hearing. she alluded to a set of plans that referred to the light well area specifically the deck and the stairs as unpermitted. i had a conversation with sanchez an hour ago where i was given notice of this. i just called my drafter. it appears there was a plan set prepared for conversation with our tenant referring to the fact that the deck that he enjoys currently that i believe he enjoys by himself exclusively we are permitting to be a private deck for him. the landlord tenant attorney wanted to specify between a space that did not be long to the tenanted before to a space that was permitted to him. this language of permitted not permitted

i'm i was asked by ms. hu to assist her with the agreement reached with the neighbors and finalizing project drawing and buildings permit. i know from the hearing this board was encouraged resolution of the creative one where the new wall will be set back three feet from the property line on the second and third floors. that's pursuant to typical planning department residential design guidelines. appellant asked for more time following the hearing, the parties met. i was part of that meeting. appellants were supportive of the three foot setback. we had an agreement. we still do. as i understand it, they continue to support this. it was the case that the parties and both planning department and d.b.i. wanted some clarification to be made in the permit drawings. we've made most of these clarifications since that time. we appreciated mr. sanchez and inspector duffy willingness to meet with us on a quick time frame. we're confident that the plans can be finalized for a hearing two weeks from now. the drawings are

ms. hu brought in professionals to scrub these plans and spend a significant amount of time with them. that has been done. they are in very good shape. i believe mr. sanchez and mr. duffy will concur that they have reviewed the plans, given them their blessing. we are ready to move forward with this. it is a significant amount of time for anyone. we have gotten there. as to the condition, it is really not necessary. the footing work being proposed is not putting the neighbors' foundation or footing at risk in any way. in the project were changed in any way and for that to change it would be subject to review by the building department if we were going below and had to touch the neighbor's property in any way, we would need their permission to do so. we think they are fully protected and the condition isn't necessary. we simply ask that the board allow this to move forward subject to the new or reviced plans submitted. we are available for any questions you may have. thank you. >> it looks li