night. obviously we are aware of with a goes on on broadway. it's punishing business owners, a moratorium like this will destroy the entertainment district which is world famous and should be preserved. on a personal note in regard to my family's building on the southeast corner of broadway that my 88-year-old grandmother is currently the deed holder for, we've been trying to remodel the building for 2 years. my grandmother is already affected by the property. moratoriums have real finance consequences for people and

can be devastated. we have requested to have our liquor license approved before the moratorium is passed. at this point we need your help. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioners that will place you under your regular calendar item 12. item 12: 2013.1648c k. burns; 4155 575-91122 1945 hyde street - between russell and union streets; lot 002 in assessor's block 0123 - request for conditional use authorization, pursuant to planning code sections 303, 710.44 and 790.91 to establish a restaurant d.b.a. union larderr which will operate as a bona fide eating place in a vacant commercial space. the property is located within a neighborhood commercial cluster district, and 40-x height and bulk district. this action constitutes the approval action for the project for the purposes of ceqa, pursuant to section 31.044hh of the san francisco calendar item 12. sf 121234 >> >> good afternoon president wu and members of the commission. planning department staff. the item before you is a request for conditional use authorization to establish a restaurant doing business as union latter erer in a quarter mile and pacific avenue. the

project sponsor proposes to establish a restaurant in the vacate ground floor commercial space. the restaurant will operate as a bonafide eating place. they are pursuing a license for beer. this building was previously occupied by a motor station and converted to seven residential condominiums with ground floor space for commercial. the department received an e-mail with additional conditions for your consideration. the department recommends approval with conditions and believes the property is necessary and/or desirable for the following reasons. the proposed restaurant will allow his

business model. the project is desired the for and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. the business is not a formula retail use. this concludes staff's presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions. >vice-president cindy wu: thank you. project sponsor? >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is jay s debanco. i have a cold. please bear with me. my wife and i, melissa would like to open a full service restaurant with a retail component at 1945 hyde street in russian hill. the space is currently vacant. we would actually be the very first occupants of this new space chls we are owners of a little vine and north beach right now where cheese wine and specialty grocery. food and wine named us best shop in the united states. we have developed an

extremely loyal customer base. we are one of the family owned independent businesses that makes san francisco so unique and special. we are proud to be at north beach merchant and enjoy being part of the community that will carry into russian hill. it will have a full service cheese counter along with especially items and food and wine of hanging meats, floor to ceiling shelves and we will be training a minimum of five full time jobs for local residents. my wife and i have lived for 5 years a half block away at 1950 hyde and it's always been my favorite block in the city. our interest is to make this special block a nice place to live and visit

and being open during the day can provide a person a meal, a cheese plate or coffee in the afternoon. something that no restaurant in that area can provide. we are grateful to have the support of the russian hill community association. thank you for your time and consideration. >vice-president cindy wu: thank you. public comment? kathleen courtney? >> good afternoon, commissioners, my name is kathleen courtney from housing and zoning for the russian hill community association. we are absolutely delighted to appear before you probably in 20 years totally in support of a project. we believe that mr. and they will be an asset to our community and have enjoyed very much our discussions with him. we totally support planner burns conditions, however, in discussion with

mr. debanco we have developed some conditions we would like you to consider in terms of our concern are garbage noise and traffic and parking. in regards to noise we request that the vent less ovens are proposed and no seating on the sidewalk keeping with the desires of the owners of the condominiums in that building also. the windows on hyde street be the closed at 8:00 to keep the noise from going up the street and a type 1 liquor license be the license there. the project sponsor has asked for 25-30 seatings. we

have accepted up to 35 so he doesn't have to return. in terms of traffic, a quarter block a way be used for delivery. we are concerned about the blockage of russel street as well as delgado and other alleys in the area and the green zone in front of swen sons is not used until noon. in terms of traffic, the delivers in front we are asking there not be any green, white or metered zoning in front of 1945 hyde. just again recognizing that this conditional use authorization does not only go with this establishment but with the property going forward. lastly, we request that russel street not be used for any

access to the restaurant regardless of how it would do. we are looking forward to having mr. debanco there. thank you. >vice-president cindy wu: is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioner sugaya? >>commissioner hisashi sugaya: do we have a copy of the letter from the russian hill association? i know it came in e-mail but i don't have it with me. sorry. and just to continue with the project sponsor? i know your place very well on grand avenue. very nice to see you expanding it a bit. i hope you are not going to abandon that store. in terms of the condition, you've discussed them with

the association? and are you pretty much on board with those? >> yes, we have no problem with those. >> with that, i will make a motion to approve with conditions including the specific ones that were submitted by the russian hill association if they are enforceable at our end? >> yes, i would like to go through those briefly. i think we have concerns about some of those. first of all we want conditions that are enforceable and we also want to be mindful that the approval runs with the land and whether or not you would like to restrict it so much that it's changing the model of oven would require coming back to the planning commission is something we need to consider. item one on their conditions regarding garbage skavgers, that's been

dealt with and vent less oven, we have issues regarding that and no fan is needed. i guess the concerns about that language. if it's the commission's desire. we already have stock language in our conditions regarding noise and odor. but if you want something more specific, we can discuss that and it might be limiting that there is to be no oven that requires a vent. i would be he is -- hesitant to restrict it down to a model. item no. 8. those items are regulated by mta and dpw in terms of whether or not something can be metered sidewalk or not. that is something that mta is responsible for and as well

as ensuring there is no blocking. that would be an mta enforcement issue. regarding seating is something that is implemented by goks department department of public works. if that's the conditional approval we could enforce that as well as eliminating the amount of seating. hours of operation, currently the zoning would allow hours of operation from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. vm what they are proposed here is an 11 p.m. closing which is what the zoning required and opening at 730 a.m.. the windows issue is a toughen enforcement issue. we typically prefer that just fixed windows is easier for us to enforce rather than going out to find out there is a

violation because the window isn't closed. the liquor license is straight forward on beer and wine and they are limited to that. i think that's relatively easy to enforce and the commission has more conditions on other projects. i think that addresses those conditions and i think it's prepared also a brief write-up of language that is simplifying those conditions that we thought would be more enforceable to put on the overhead and add as part of the record if you so choose. that would be regarding the oven, the hours of operation, seating and abc license. >> i can read them out. >> you can read it out lookout

-- loud. >> for the oven, the subject establishment may only install a vent less oven that requires no exhaust installation. hours of operation the establishment is listed for following hour of operation 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.. seating no outdoor seating. maximum seating limited to 35 seats. abc license to type 41, on sale beer or wine. eating place only. issue type 4979, pursuant to planning code requires conditional use by the planning commission. >> and the windows if you want to further limit that. we'll do our best to implement any

conditions that you impose. >vice-president cindy wu: commissioner antonini? >>commissioner michael j. antonini: i would move. commissioner dr. roscoe m. moore jr: i second the motion. >> i'm okay with the motion with the last four or five. city clerk: your motion would be amended from the original to modify the conditions as proposed originally into the record by staff. >>commissioner michael j. antonini: it would be the original conditions and the added ones. city clerk: is that acceptable? >> yes. >> thank you. >> i was going to say that i'm in agreement with that and in agreement with the zoning administrator to not address the windows issue because

it's difficult for enforcement. >> commissioner moore? >> i think it's the window relative to the type of expansion. since the applicant seems to have a good relationship with the neighborhood association, i would have them work together in the future to retain the good relationship and the window issue would solve itself. i can see in the middle of the day particular lau e when the cable car is operating alongside, there is quite a bit of activity on the street. when you open the window to chat or what. perhaps along the even, perhaps they can talk to each other. >> i'm in favor of that. even

though the golden gate restaurant, they are not a member. city clerk: commissioners, if there is nothing further i will call the question. there is a motion to approve as amended by staff. commissioner and any, hillis, moore, sugaya, fong, and commission president wu. that passes unanimously 7-0. commissioners that will place you on items 13a and b item 13a: 2011.1373cv d. vu; 4155 575-91200 4126 17th street - north side between douglass and castro streets; lot 028 in assessor's block 2623 - request for conditional use authorization, pursuant to planning code

sections 209.11hh, 303, and 3177ddd22 to demolish the existing single-family dwelling and construct a three-unit residential building at the front, and a single-family dwelling at the rear of the approximately 5,549 square feet lot. the project site is located within a rh-3 residential house, three-familyy zoning district, and 40-x height and bulk district. this action constitutes the approval action for the project for the purposes of ceqa, pursuant to section 31.044hh of the san francisco administrative code. 1234 item 13b;2011.1373cv d. vu; 4155 575-91200 4126 17th street - north side between douglass and castro streets; lot 028 in assessor's block 2623 - request for a variance from the rear yard planning code section 1344 and exposure planning code section 1400 requirements to allow a single-family dwelling at the rear of the lot - the project site is located within a rh-3 residential house, three-familyy zoning district, and 40-x height and bulk district. 1234 >> >> good afternoon, commissioners. department staff. the case before you is request for conditional use operation to demolish a single family dwelling and construct four dwelling units on . three family dwellings will be constructed at the front of the lot and approximately 2400 square foot would be at the rear of the project. it will require rear yard variance. p project does meet the ex-power -- requirement code. the project is located in the castro upper market neighborhood between douglas and castro street within anrh 3 zoning district. it's upsloping with an elevation

of 10 feet at the front and 218 feet at the rear. it's currently improved as a 2 story family dwelling with a 2-car garage constructed prior to 1906. the neighborhood contains a mix of residential structure in style and density. it's two-3 stories height and contain one dwelling unit and there is a 33-unit development. the majority of the buildings on the blocks between diamond were construct between 1900 and 1917. to the east many properties were redeveloped in the 60 sz and 80s. unlike a typical 25-foot width of an rh 3 zone lot. the lots vary

from 65 feet not to mention the condominium development which has 104 feet. 600 feet east of the property are the neighborhood commercial transit and castro street neighborhood commercial districts. as of today the department has received just one letter from the castro eureka valley neighborhood association which stated it's non-opposition to the granting of the rear yard variance because of the unique block to the subject property. the department has found the property to be on balance necessary and desirable for the following reasons: although the existing structure is more than 50 years old, it was reclassified for a category building and not considered a historical resource and this will

maintain a mid-block open space character. the height and depth are compatible with the immediate context and adjacent properties that allow for light and air along the east and west facade. these properties have been addressed by minimal amounts of glazing towards them. the form facade widths proportion gradually step upsloping topography. the structures are face the neighborhood character. the glaes, aluminum doors and along the primary facade are in character and offer a contemporary expression to the revival style building in the surrounding neighborhood. with the exception of the rear yard requirement, the project is code compliant. this district is intended to accommodate a

greater density than what currently exist under this under utilized lot and to accommodate maximum density. finally the project will result in a net gain of three dwelling units and all four 4 units will be family sized with three bedrooms each. retaining to the department use. the department recommends approval of this project. i'm available for questions. >vice-president cindy wu: thank you. project sponsor? >> thank you commissioners.

congratulations president wu. i'm pleased to present today a project at 412617 street. my name is fill ips and representing the project. this project as mentioned by staff is bringing four new family homes to the upper castro market neighborhood all in large size units between 17 and 78 square footage split into two buildings. this is to add additional unit in the neighborhood in the rear yard variance. i should note at the outset that the unit that is proposed for demolition is both non-historic and not rent controlled. i will give it to the architect. >> good afternoon, commissioners, my name is

brad tirl. an associate. the project is located in the upsloping parcel. the project proposes a tariff building which splits a four three bedroom units between the two structures while providing a generous mid-yard open space. the front building comprised is setback from the street and accessible by steps extending from the eastern edge of the property. this is a condition somewhat to the neighborhooding situation where we have a rather deep loth and a second structure at the back lot that is accessible through a pathway. a smaller rear building separated by a common courtyard is a 3 story single family home and conpan i -- conpan come pan i that

companion. the bill above grade is up the hillside below the height limit. you can see that in the next slide here. this slide section indicating a step massing appropriated to an upsloping lot where foundations and the like are mitigated to render a shorter building above grade. the building, further using set backs and eliminating heights with roof lines accordingly. with the composition mitigate the impact of the massing and the context to the neighbors emphasize the building is well proportioned. the design approach is we wanted to note the characteristic of the neighborhood conditions that is rather eclectic in terms of the situation adjacent left

and right and the topology that we have across the street. in our design approach both structures are distinct and structured architecturally. the front structure utilizes simple interest lock k volumes and contrasting void with materials. contemporary style with materials selection and landscaping both being considered. the design is much dialogue and neighbors and staff. the design product is over the last several years. this you very much and i'm happy to answer questions specifically about the design. >> i wanted to make a couple keypoints, some which were touched on by staff. i wanted to speak quickly on this variance. this was arrived upon with a fair amount over the many years. as stated

before we are on an upsloping deep facing lot. it was originally approved for a 5-year project taking over 75 percent of the lot. that's in the packet letter provided to you. however, we feel this project is somewhat unique because of the pattern on the mid-block area and the mid-lot space which is created by some prevalence of some rear yard homes in the area. it's in response to this design that we've come up with this. i can sort of run to give you a little visual. the green is the mid-block area, the red is the property site. you can see with the project coming in there and here is an a little bit of an overview. that mid-lot open space. the project helps define while maintaining the connection between the corridor and light and air that would otherwise be interrupted in a larger code compliant building with

a 25 percent rear yard. it's also important to know that the mid-yard space is close to 30 percent and would provide more open space. also i wanted to speak quickly to the demolition request. as stated earlier with a single family home with one bedroom is in a lot size that can support at a thousand square foot up to 5 units. also as a single family home, the unit being demolished is not subject to rent control, no evictions have taken place on the 20 years that it's been owned by the project sponsor, there is currently a staff person residing there taking care of the site. no eviction will take place. the sponsor has taken this project quite

seriously and we held a meeting and got comments back and continued to work with interested neighbors in the area including the neighbors immediately adjacent to work towards modifying the design in such a way to make it more compatible with the neighborhood and be responsive to the concerns if they had. the project refinements in this included bringing down the height and scoping the back of the building to be aligned with adjacent buildings and working on material selections and landscaping. it's always been our goal to get the enthusiastic support of our neighbors, we fell short of that goal but feel as part of our last conversations we feel we have no expressed opposition to that and we have a letter from epa. finally from the needs and goals as mentioned earlier in this

commission hearing, there is a need for new housing in san francisco and a crisis to provide that housing and those units will be placed throughout the city. this project is a unique opportunity to take underdeveloped lot and provide this kind of housing in a neighborhood that is established as well as being transit friendly and this project makes it a typical and what's offered in the city. this meets the family needs. in general information what we feel this project is a sensitive balance between providing more housing in san francisco with an approach to the development. thank you very much and we are available for questions. >vice-president cindy wu: thank you. let's open up for public comment. i have one speaker card, william lowe.

>> thank you, ladies and gentlemen and gentlemen of the commission. my name is bill lowe, property owner adjacent to the east. this has been a 20 something year odyssey. they bought this property quite a while ago. at that time i was told that within six 6 six 6 months they would be rebuilding and developing. i have gone to community meetings and talked to doug vu, rick crawford who came down and representing the city before doug vu. i have had primarily two issues with the developers and they have never been met. basically when i bring them up i get stoned with silence, i'm ignored. one is under cutting my foundation. i'm on one level