to answer some of the comments, mr. ionin maybe you can answer a couple of questions but i think the d.r. requester was talking about the height of the building being higher than his structure. it hrblooks fairly close to me. even if it is a little higher, my recollection is that pre-sinkhole that was pretty high, too. i don't know but i'm remembering from my memory it always had a pitched roof. >> the issue regarding the height, commissioners, in this particular building proposal, the oddity is even though they are building over the garage it is technically a horizon addition from the front of the building because the height of the building the way the planning code measures it is not increasing. the height of the portion of the building over the garage is increasing. so, just to be clear, we recognize that the height of the building over the garage is increasing but the height of the building is not changing. in fact, the portion that is being added over the garage as indicated by the architect is lower than the similar typ

then with respect to the rear s setback requirement, mr. ionin showed you the shaded area but it is already built into the rear set pwbg. it is existing. so, if the proposal is accepted, 60% of the rear setback requirement will be eliminated. so, taking away all the open space right next to the presidio and scenic street in a neighborhood where there is open space and all the neighbors have a lot of open space and they comply with the setback requirements and it is inconsistent with the master plan. there is a window with the direct site line into my bedr m bedroom. there is a closed in feeling that was not there before on my property. there is an issue with the plans. the approved plans have a -- the rear wall of the property is two feet shorter than the proposed plans and that is something that is not addressed in the plans. that is something that hasn't been subject to the 311 notification as well. i will also note in the department's analysis of neighborhood consistency they have indicated the bay windows and dormers are consistent with the n

is that correct, mr. ionin? so we have a situation where if no neighbors had complained in this situation the present condition of this house would remain. so it depended on a community to sort of figure out what was going on, that it wasn't in conformance with the original plans. from that standpoint alone i don't think that the planning commission should be in a position to approve and essentially condone a process that shouldn't have taken place in the first place. so, i'm going to move to take d.r. and deny the project. president olague: commissioner miguel. vice president miguel: a couple of questions. there was a request regarding proper notice and times of notice regarding this hearing, this postponed hearing. could you review that? >> yes. again, nothing was easy with this case. the 311 notification was issued in december which expired in janua january. the variance was scheduled to coincide with the ending of the d.r. filing date. so that if a d.r. was filled the variance wouldn't be heard by the zoning