mr. patel created hardship for himself after blatant disregard of the building permit process. mr. patel began addition on his house without seeking a permit in his first place, and when he did file for a permit, he requested a building permit for a two-unit permit, and under the code, the section that nms. kenney is in, you are only allowed a one-unit permit. there is still remarkable evidence to show that there is a two-unit plan proceeding. there are two mail slots. there are two dresses, two -- two addresses, two satellite hookups. the building passed the setback requirements, and then she issued another complaint. despite receiving in order to cease and desist with construction, mr. patel continued, and this application for the zoning was after he violated the setback requirement. it is just a pattern of acting first and in complying with requirements later. the purpose of zoning requirements is to maintain the enjoyment of property, and although the setback has only been violated by 1.5 f

mr. patel continued, and this application for the zoning was after he violated the setback requirement. it is just a pattern of acting first and in complying with requirements later. the purpose of zoning requirements is to maintain the enjoyment of property, and although the setback has only been violated by 1.5 feet, it is a violation nonetheless. this has caused a huge eyesore in the backyard of ms. kenney, creating a large shadow over her yard. plants have started to die, and there is a concern about the property value in relation to this violation. and i would like to turn it over to ms. kenney so she can make a statement. >> i wanted to point out, too, the 311 that was submitted falsified information. what he basically did was for the existing conditions, he put down the proposed conditions. and he said no change for the proposed, so when we first saw it, we did not think there are going to be any changes, and when we first realized there were going to be changes, we went to the dbi and t

mr. patel? >> hi, my name is michael mcghee, in by a licensed contractor here in san francisco -- and i unlicensed contractor. i want everyone to know that all the construction projects that i do always go through the planning and building department. sometimes at my chagrin, because i get a little bit in patients sometimes that the project is a lot longer than i anticipated. the certain project at 48 newton, i started to be involved in this project when i met mr. patel at the building department, there for another issue. he mentioned he had a violation. i ended up turning that totally around for him and got new architectural drawings done. it got submitted to the planning department and got approved, and then there was a 311 report, and something else got approved, and then i pulled the necessary permits. that is what i do on every single job here in the city. i am a little baffled in their position in that i am wondering if we are here for the same reason. i thought we were here for the rear y

mr. patel's house. you can see that his house and at the steps where our house is. is three or 4 feet to the fence. where the lattice was was a deck. commissioner fung: from that photo, you are implying a relationship would establish the rear wall of the building as the spot with the steps. your other photos do not show those steps. >> but i also have -- commissioner hwang: you had it right the first time. commissioner garcia: move the microphone. commissioner hwang: where would your daughter be standing, with respect to these pictures. ? >> she is standing near our door to our garage. commissioner garcia: you have to point to the picture for us to understand. the other picture. >> she is standing probably down here a ways. commissioner hwang: you are saying the existing building would have been -- that whole part of the building to the side is mr. patel's building? was that completely nonexistent? was that the point of the photograph? >> you can see the sights set back now. you can see that it was raised by four feet and expanded by 7 feet. commissioner hwang: i am

mr. patel's building? was that completely nonexistent?

mr. patel created hardship for himself after blatant disregard of the building permit process. mr. patel began addition on his house without seeking a permit in his first place, and when he did file for a permit, he requested a building permit for a two-unit permit, and under the code, the section that nms. kenney is in, you are only allowed a one-unit permit. there is still remarkable evidence to show that there is a two-unit plan proceeding. there are two mail slots. there are two dresses, two -- two addresses, two satellite hookups.

mr. patel's building filled in a fairly large gap of space between where the fence ended on the top picture. do you see where that bush starts? does the things keep going behind that bush? >> yes. i put the bush up. you can see i have attachment e, which shows you before i put the bush up. i put that up so they could have some privacy. i can show you e again.. commissioner hwang: can you help me with this? can you describe what -- how much -- what is the distance between the old building -- the existing building and the new building? >> it is kind of tough to tell from this picture because the perspective is kind of skewed. what i found helpful for a reference point is -- i guess that is the deck fence. it corresponds right here. if you look at the same top fence, it ends right around here. also, you can use this from here to here and here to here as a reference point to show how dramatically. commissioner hwang: how many feet? >> 7 feet. commissioner hwang: thank you. i still do not understand the little girl picture. thank you. president peterson: commissioners, are there any further ques