Thank you. Welcome, Vice President. So now we are moving on. As i mentioned before, were going to have a slight change in the order. The parties for item number 11, this is appeal number 19016 have come to an agreement and they would like to address the board on this agreement. This is Andrew Rabinovich and irina strigo opposing the department of building inspection. This is for 157 marview way. This is appealing the issuance of march 6, 2019, to Andrew Rabinovich of an alteration permit to memorialise the replacement of the exterior facade from existing siding and also replacement of the garage door with new glass rollup garage door. So the subject permit that is before you for 157 marview way is the result of an enforcement action for work on the facade that was done without benefit of the permit and the permit is attempting to correct that. I wont go into full consideration of the boards calendar, but we have reached a compromise agreement on a project that may move forward. I have
Building because the first floor consists of two units one and two afternoon the second floor is one unit, unit number three and third floor is just one unit, unit four. However, on the second and third floor there are two separate access doors to the unit and at the same time there has been installation of gas lines and plumbing to both the front part facing the ocean and the rear part facing the part of the unit. Each unit third and fourth unit consists of four bedrooms. I believe the architect will address this issue. I believe it was in the original plan this is intended to be a six unit building. For some reason at some point, the buildings have changed. The developers changed their mind and the building is two units on the first floor, one full unit on the second floor and the third one. Now, appl applelant indicated violation of Building Code. We will address that. As far as i know, there has been no violation of Building Code because there is no encroachment upon the use of the
With three stories and originally to be a six unit building because the first floor consists of two units one and two afternoon the second floor is one unit, unit number three and third floor is just one unit, unit four. However, on the second and third floor there are two separate access doors to the unit and at the same time there has been installation of gas lines and plumbing to both the front part facing the ocean and the rear part facing the part of the unit. Each unit third and fourth unit consists of four bedrooms. I believe the architect will address this issue. I believe it was in the original plan this is intended to be a six unit building. For some reason at some point, the buildings have changed. The developers changed their mind and the building is two units on the first floor, one full unit on the second floor and the third one. Now, appl applelant indicated violation of Building Code. We will address that. As far as i know, there has been no violation of Building Code b
We have looked and would commit. Were in ab 900 stewardship and we have committed to Greenhouse Gases and as far as specific our sustainability plan has all of the sustainability plan for the project and targets we intend to hit and we look forward as our grid continues to green and improve. I think a passive house would go beyond that. At a minimum, it might be interesting for you folks to consider whether you create a passive house at your proposed hotel. Well look into it before the next meeting. Commissioner hillis. Thank you for the presentation. Its always good to, i think, hear about this project i think i think its testament to what youve all done in meeting some of the community request and just developing a project that i think works great on this site. Its a mas massive site. Were getting a ton of Affordable Housing and the amount youre providing on a site not owned by the city, thats privately owned. So i mean, i think its a wonderful project. Its great for this neighborhoo
Outoftown developer. My client has resided there some of that time and not some of that time and i believe he has the right to use his property as he views fit. The lower view knit i unit is oy the owners cousin. I believe that the upper unit is currently occupied by friends of the owner and they will move out when the time comes and no evictions necessary to do this work. Its my understanding he intends to use this as a pietta tare. They claim this is out of scale with the neighborhood and that the additional block will cast unreasonable shadows on neighbours since there are no others fronting winter place. I think this is erroneous. There are no other buildings fronting winter place, half of the buildings on this block are four stories tall and many of them actually front or rear, shall we say, as opposed to winter place. They front on union street or mason street and theres more buildings that are fourstories tall than the ones that arent. I think we have incomplete, erroneous infor