mr. durkin himself filed at 1026 clayton. in this appeal, mr. durkin himself and his law firm said, a project should not be exempted from ceqa review because it may affect a historical resources. in that case, the neighbor wanted to put a roof deck on a garage and mr. durkin said it would affect the historic resource. in that case, no property had been listed as historic, unlike in this case, where we're talking about a category a1 resource that will be adversely affected. what applies with mr. durkin's neighbors should apply to mr. kauffman. thank you. >> president breed: thank you. that brings us to the end of our hearing. this hearing has been held and is now closed. this matter is in the hands of the board of supervisors. supervisor farrell? >> supervisor farrell: thank you, president breed. i have thoughts on this, but i will defer to colleagues if you have any further questions. >> president breed: before i call on supervisor farrell, supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: relative to the last hearing we had where we were all deeply troub

mr. christopher durkin, has racked up four separate notices of violation. he's been racing to build the property as quickly as possible, even in the face of inadequate permits. the notices of violation were issued for work beyond the scope of the permit. he was ordered to stop work. on one day, he removed the chimney from the roof, creating a giant, gaping hole. he proceeded on the very next day to remove a second chimney and create a second gaping hole in the roof that led to a third notice of violation. he pleaded then to tear out the foundation of the property. again, receiving a fourth notice of violation for work beyond the scope of the permit. this is clearly a scoff law developer that is willing to pay trivial penalties to destroy historical property. this past sunday, "the san francisco chronicle" ran an article about developers tearing down and harming historically significant properties, which is what is happening in this case. it should stop. it should stop here. it should stop now. what we're asking for is simply for the developer to comply with