and with that, jenny pauling will be next and then followed by ms. ayello >> good afternoon, members of the board. i'm jeany pauling, environmental planner. the department's responses to the issues can be grouped into two categories -- procedural and substantive. the first that the planning department didn't comply with the posting required in chapter 31 of the administrative code because incorrect approval action was listed. chapter 31 does require that the approval action be listed and the appellant is correct, that building correct was listed when it should have been listed planning commission hearing. this was a procedural oversight. however, the agenda item posted on planning's website six days before the hearing correctly stated that the authorization constitutes approval action for the project. the appellant, mr. bernstein, was clearly aware as he received notice with the appeal information. he attended and spoke at the hearing and he filed the appeal in a timely manner. the hearing language in the notice of the agenda adequately provided info