not only is that something that mark holbert doesn't agree with and chris buckley from alameda and oakland historic but neither did the planning commissioner at the hearing. i would like quickly to read a couple of things from what he said "is there really enough integrity left for this structure to continue to convey its historic significance? haven't the alterations severely reduced all or some of the seven aspebts of integrity"? why wasn't this carriage house compared with other carriage houses? the greater neighborhood? i don't believe the description of what would have been allowed -- of what would be allowed in this alternative would meet the reconstruction standards stating by the planning department. the planning department here is really in a minority in its opinions. chief frye and discussed earlier the likelihood that the preservation board priest to this one or the h.b.c. has ever turned down all the e.i.r. alternatives that were put before it. basically killing a project unprecedented. but it was done here. mr. frye said our building is false -- but take a look at the barn. th