A review of quiet-hour rules, shared room bookings and tenant requests finds a gap between the total in the public summary and the conditions recorded at the south courtyard houses. The difference does not prove that anyone misstated the file. It shows what the public count leaves out: the same warming room serves residents who sleep at different hours.
The quiet-hour rules, shared room bookings and tenant requests lists 59 households with a usable shared room across both schedules; the previous window lists 54. Mira Noct checked both against household interviews paired with the posted schedule and room calendar. The source was checked against a second copy held by Mira Noct. No dated correction to either copy was present when the comparison closed.
The building board prefers one long quiet block. Residents ask for shorter periods that leave a shared meal hour open. The office has not supplied a separate measure that would settle the disagreement, so the two explanations remain competing accounts.
This report supports a narrower finding: the count is repeatable, but it is not enough to decide how a building can set quiet hours without excluding one group from the only shared room.
The clerk matches the current rule to the dated amendment and public notice. The Year first, late winter window 3 file remains open for its scheduled decision. The tenant table will compare two quiet schedules during one calendar window.
