the subject property is located within the zoning district and seeks to merge the dwelling units from three to two. that was approved by the zoning administrator and includes a horizontal expansion at the rear but doesn't extend to the property line and maintain a three-foot side setback. the subject building application that was submitted in october of 2008. the required neighborhood notification was completed in august and september of 2009. there were no discretionary review requests filed. the building permit was reviewed and issued and we have the appeal. the proposed application is very reasonable and complies with the guidelines and no way does it maximize the development potential or adverse impact on the neighbor's property and believe that the permit holder's offer of further restricting the

hours of construction is a really good neighbor gesture. they could operate seven days a week, 12 hours or so a day, so any effort they would have to reduce that would have to address the neighbor's concerns adequately. thank you. >> good evening. tom, d.b.i. we have a site permit and we are approved on the concept. and obvious they need to -- the project sponsor needs to submit a further review. i do see a three-foot setback to property line in the new area. there would be some consideration of -- and the reason i'm going about and bringing this up, there was an

issue about fire -- fire with structures being so close together. but this area of the new addition would have to be one-hour construction just by code. anything else? >> any public comment? i see none. we'll move into rebuttal. you have three minutes. >> i do have some windows on the side of my building, is that what you were talking about, just the side where he would be coming out? i wish i had a photo of my home. i have an i have an 8 foot window on the side of my home.

on the third floor, i have two fairly large windows, probably six by six on either side. it gives a lot of light. i am -- i know the air and the like will be blocked. that is all there is to it. i am wondering if something can be done about that, if we could work out some skylights or something. but it is definitely going to change the lighting in my home, and the air. there is no doubt. these windows -- the top floor has a back -- deck that is fairly open. i think something will occur there as well. so that is what i am -- i just hope you consider as well.

thank you. commissioner fung: the permit holder has indicated -- i will ask you the same question in confirmation. the rear of your building, there is a recess at the rear of the building. is that correct? in other words, from the property line, the wall is recess back at the rear of your building. -- recessed back at the rear of your building. vice president garcia: do you have a copy of exhibit 1? if you would refer to that, if you do not mind. commissioner fung: no.

so if you would look at the site/roof plan. site and roof plan. so your house is -- looking at that sheet, your house is to the right of the murphy's. to the bottom of the image related to your floor plan, you see a series of lines that show a recess from the property line going in an eastward direction. that represents -- >> that is a stairway. commissioner fung: that is a stairway?

>> yes, a widening stairwell going up to the second floor. commissioner fung: where are the windows located? >> there are windows right along, right where the staialond of that, -- the outer end of that is part of a deck. that is like a glass wall there. as you go up to the second floor -- actually, in the first floor, if you keep going where the.is -- the dot is, that is where you will find a lot of skylights. i have a big skylight as well that goes down to the garage, and a large eight by six window in the dining room. all along here, i have a lot of light, actually. so that is probably the -- what you are seeing their -- there

is going down to the garage. i cannot explain what it is. it is sort of gain -- of a roof lighting piece there. vice president garcia: if you do not mind, would you put that on the overhead? as you are describing these features, point out where they are. i might be the only one confused. >> yes. obviously, the sight of my building their -- the side of my building there is one wall going all the way up to the fourth floor, including the basement and garage. what do you want to know? vice president garcia: first of

all, the way this is drawn, it goes front to back. >> yes. vice president garcia: so the windows you are describing -- would you point to where those are? >> window here. window here. this is going down to the garage. you go up to the third floor and you will see windows right above the windows i just pointed to. vice president garcia: and the circular staircase you were describing would be where on that rendering? >> right here. vice president garcia: i had thought the commissioner was asking you about the back. >> i know. there are 2 the luster cases, one here and won here. -- there are two staircases, one here and one here.

this goes from the outside yard to the kitchen. vice president garcia: thank you. >> thank you. mr. murphy. no rebuttal? ok. mr. sanchez. >> i would like to put on the overhead and an aerial photo that might help show the subject property. this long building is the permit holder's property. the adjacent building is the appellant's property. commissioner fung: excuse me. victor, can you grow -- blow that up a little bit? thank you. that is good. thank you. >> this would be the -- my finger is huge. this would be the permit

holder's property. this is the appellant's property. you can see there is quite a recess already between the buildings. the rear of building walls are a southern-facing exposures. i would not think this would have a great addition to shut up, especially considering the shadows in the photo. the existing building already extends in such a nature. that already casts a shadow on the appellate of property. i do not think there would be net new addition of shadowed by the project. -- of shadow by the project. commissioner fung: those shadows look like it is early afternoon already. thank you for your ipad. vice president garcia: do you charge the city when you use your ipad to help us out? >> the matter is submitted.

president goh: commissioners? commissioner fung: i will start. i think it would -- just to summarize my view, because my questions are all geared that way, i would assume and it is probably correct that the portion of the appellant's building where there are no setbacks in her building probably have no windows. at the point where there are starting to be setbacks, it appears there are a number of windows. she has mentioned a number of different floors. primarily on the second and third floor. i would concur with the zoning

administrator's assessment of direct sunlight patterns going into that. it is not likely the addition will cast any further shadow. however, the addition does come closer to her building. therefore, in terms of ambient light, it affects it a little bit. in terms of the overall impact, we are talking about the permit holder having made an accommodation by keeping his building off the property line. i think that is significant in this overall discussion. the issue of how much accommodation one makes with respect to the property line

situation is usually very limited in our city and in the various types of projects we hear. i think this is significant accommodation. i do not see that the issues of light and air are significant enough for me to impact this particular permit. president goh: i agree with that. other comments? or is there a motion? vice president garcia: i agree with everything that has been said. i guess in order to accommodate the appellant somewhat, not that i suspect mr. murphy of having made statements that he would restrict building or construction activities to monday through friday -- i do not know what hours he intended that to be. if mr. murphy would come forward and tell us what he considers to

be reasonable hours? >> thank you, commissioners. bart murphy, a permit holder. the more hours we work, the quicker the job gets done. 7:30 to 6:00? vice president garcia: i would even be willing to give him half a day saturday. i do not think that is too interested. do you feel you need the saturday? i agree with your sentiments that the quicker it gets done the better off the appellant is going to be. you need to come up here if you are going to address the board. commissioner fung: if mr. murphy offered the weekdays, i

think that makes sense. we are seeing a boom of construction in the higher-end neighborhoods. i have firsthand experience with the pounding on the weekend, which is the only time i get off, you know? i think we days, if you can do it, is reasonable. 7:30 to 6:00 is a reasonable time. >> is there any way i can get an inspector to come and look at the property line? or is it too late for that? vice president garcia: for what purpose? >> just to view the properly to -- the property line, to see -- as far as you have seen, there are no windows according to the drawings you have seen from him. i just wanted you to see how much like i do get. vice president garcia: -- light i do get. vice president garcia: i think

we understand that. i do not mean this quickly, but you did had the opportunity to present to us, and we are trying to help you a little bit by constructing -- by restricting the construction hours from 7:30 to 6:00. >> i had no idea you could work 12 hours a day. commissioner fung: there is no limit within the building code. >> is that right? ok. vice president garcia: i would make a motion to uphold the permit and to add a restriction that construction only take place on weekdays from 7:30 in the morning until 6:00 at night. >> that would be a motion to grant the appeal, which would require four votes, because you are conditioning the permit. vice president garcia: thank you, madam director. >> on that motion from the vice

president to uphold the permit with the condition that construction be limited to monday through friday, 7:30 to 6:00. on that motion. commissioner fung: aye. president goh: aye. commissioner peterson: aye. >> commissioner hwang is absent. the permit is upheld with conditions. >> there are no further items this evening. vice president garcia: i wish you a productive, enjoyable trip to china. and your daughter. have a fabulous time. president goh: thank you. we are adjourned.

>> good afternoon. this is the regular meeting of the san francisco planning commission for thursday, june 9, 2011. prior to taking role, let me

remind everyone to turn off your cell phones or any other electronic devices that may sound off during the meeting. [roll call] thank you. we have a full commission. commissioners, first category on your calendar is consideration of items proposed for continuance. item 1 is case 201 1.1015t to add new alternatives to the market and actively of land area. the items proposed for continuance to june 23, 2011. item two is case 2011.0296c proposed for continuance to july

14, 2011. i, unfortunately, am not aware of any other item on your calendar being proposed for continuance. commissioner olague: public comment on items being proposed for continuance? if he could come to the microphone, sir. -- if you could come to the microphone, sir. >> my name is david gruber, and i'm here for the item on hugo street. there was a flurry of e-mails this morning between the contractor of the sponsor about -- requested a postponement. commissioner olague: commissioners, i will just ask that because there was no written request for continuance that you take up the matter at the call of that item and not during this time. >> ok, we will have to take at the call of the item, sir. since there was no written request and many of us were busy -- we are busy with our jobs before coming here. we did not have access. >> we are, too. we came down your special for

this. commissioner olague: it will be discussed and considered at that time. any additional comments on items proposed for continuance? public comment is closed. commissioner antonini: move to continue items one and two to the dates proposed. commissioner moore: second. >> thank you, commissioners. on the motion for continuance, -- commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner borden: aye. commissioner fong: aye. commissioner miguel: aye. commissioner olague: aye. >> thank you. those items have been continued as they have been proposed. commissioners, you are now at commission matters. are there any commission matters? commissioner olague: i wanted to mention at this time that we will close the meeting in honor of the two firemen who lost

their lives. commissioner antonini: thank you. i was absent last week on a family vacation to hawaii, and aside from the usual golf and beach activities, i did spend a couple of days touring honolulu and i was pretty impressed with the changes since i had been there. it had been quite a while. like a lot of other cities i see, i think it is instructive that it was noticeably clean. there's not a lot of trash on the ground, and as you know, they have a lot of wind there, too, so i do not think we could blame that, and not much graffiti was invisible. i went through many parts of the city. the other thing they do that i think is pretty successful -- i'm not exactly sure how it works -- but parks are closed between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m., so while people can occupy the parts for as long as they want during the other hours,

when that time comes, those who are there are asked to leave except for passageways on sidewalks going through. they say it has been quite successful. i'm not sure how they do that, but it sounds like something we might want to look into. other than that, we also are a site for much tourism, and i think it's certainly marked a difference what you see in honolulu, or at least the parts i was in, and that was the downtown area, also, and what you see in terms of the negative items. we can always take lessons from other places. unfortunately i also -- or fortunately, i did take a wonderful tour of pearl harbor, the uss missouri, which could have been in san francisco and probably would have been, but unfortunately, there was a lot of opposition, and now, it is in pro harbor. >> i have the pleasure tuesday

evening of being at the green room of the war memorial building and saw the model for the war memorial. they are very interesting. the arts commission is leading the design. the selection on this was very well attended, and the plaza itself will be deemed in honor of george and charles schulz who were present, and everyone has their favorites, but i think any of them would do the city proud. commissioner sugaya: i see on

the advanced calendar that there might be an informational presentation on the academy of art university coming up. i think we concluded this week in discussions that we would defer that. >> i was just thinking they either have purchased or are in negotiation for purchase of the cannery, i believe it is. i would be in support of a closed hearing before we move forward in a public hearing. commissioner moore: i have been meeting with the department of informational technology. i realize strong ties for planning as a user group to

informational technology. and many exciting projects. at some point, it might be interesting to have someone else from the department -- to have these people talk to us, which comes from the commission to planning challenges and do what planning does and has successfully done for establishing a powerful web site. a treasure trove of wealth these people have appeared from an idea point, it is quite exciting to listen to them, particularly as it challenges come to the city with america's cup, and while they are brainstorming with the next layer, it might well sued us and be very fun to listen to some, so we can kind of head a tentative date or have

it on our things to do calendar, that would be a good idea. commissioner borden: i know that members of the public already know this, but i will not be here next thursday, and the reason is because it is the 100th anniversary of ibm, the company for which i work for, which has been in san francisco since 1914, the we have been in san francisco for almost as long as we have been around as a company. on the 15th, the day before, our company is having a global day of service, so employees around the world. we will be installing solar panels around our home and bayview hunters point. we will also be working at st. anthony's clinic, working with patients there through a community health center initiative we are working on. people are also being trained with the red cross, and others will be volunteering in open public schools, so it is exciting because we have a lot of fun things going on and around the globe where our company has had a challenge.

we are challenging everyone to pledge eight hours of service in the year 2011. commissioner sugaya: speaking of i.t. and ibm, i am trying to connect these things on pretty much a lack of information at the moment. it seems that salesforce has done a pretty nice job in their architectural work with respect to their campus. one of the comments i noted in the paper was that they seem to have opened up the campus to the public with access ways and open space areas. that kind of attitude seems to me to be very good for san francisco. when companies take that attitude, i noted in the paper

there is a proposal from apple to create a new campus with some kind of circular building that seems to be totally the opposite of what salesforce is doing. of course, i do not have details. there may be penetrations into that, but the secular space of the courtyard in between does not seem to be as penetrable as the salesforce campus. some clips from mr. jobs also indicate that he may not be quite as attuned to what apple may do for cupertino as salesforce seems to be doing for san francisco. he basically said they could not build it here, we would just go somewhere else. >> [inaudible] commissioner sugaya: is in cupertino, but he was quoted as saying something to the council that they were not going to prove it, they could just go to mountain view or somewhere else. and also, some