Its our centennial year. We were founded in 1917 by two women on centennial and we serve 430 collegiate level students and the only conservatory west of the Mississippi River and run an extensive precollege program. Every year we reach thousand of School Children throughout the city. An integrative part of our Teaching Program is the fact the students are engaged and we provide Services Free of charge to all the children in our community. The Program Provides bachelors and masters degrees. Youve heard us with the opera and major motion pictures, if you have had students study around the area and elementary schools, they can be found in all the community. Were a highly diverse institution. Were 24 of our students have of color from across the United States of the america. This building is a critical piece. Housing has become a dire need. 98 of our students receive financial aid. We give back 53 cents on every tuition dollar in the form of scholarship. Students attend because of ability and talent and find making access is important. Housing is such an important consideration we need to look at building the building. Theyre consuming lowincome housing often having to work or commute distances that are not helpful. It not only gives them a Solid Community but decompress the inventory and were looking forward to replacing the housing on site. Were excite to provide for all of our tenants to the offsite units. I would like you to consider the project. The president of the Steinway Institution is a graduate. Were glad to see them doing many great things for the city. Im honored to be here. Thank you. Im trying to get the power point. We can start the presentation. Thank you for giving us a few minutes to present our project. Were excited about moving this forward. Its a celebrated institution and we also would like to think it will be a very good project for the city for the civic center specifically and city broadly. We hope when you see what the project will entail, youll feel largely the same way. This blue box is the conservatory a block and a half from the oprah, across from davies, close to the school of the art will be located and right in the heart. And it has networking ties to all of them. The house is not in great shape and the idea is to build a building that looks like this image which will be 12 stories total. It contains housing for the students and limited housing for faculty, educational uses and three different performing spaces that will be made available to the public, most of the time, most of the year. Its a fabulous opportunity. We have zero increase in the annual shadow and thats been designed as the building was constructed carefully and there was great care to make sure we did that. If you look at the crosssection theres the opportunity to have a specific view of city hall dome and because its a public space its something many san franciscans can enjoy it and this is the image from the space. Thats a literal view of what the city hall dome will be like within that room. If we look at the ground floor plan, we have a cafe and the entrance lobby down the middle and performance on the corner of hayes and van ness and a student space on the corner. All open and active. The building will be in use most hours of day and night and what will be a wonderful addition to whats been a challenging corner for hayes and van ness for a long time. The next image we see the Performance Space and its a wonderful space used for educational purpose and people from outside the conserve atory. The following images ill show the benefits to the street life. And what it may mean for haight street. What the main lobby looks like for people to come in whether its students or people in the replacement housing or guests of the community to hear a performance or go to the cafe or learn with the school. Here we have a view from the corner and from davies and how much it will add life to that block of van ness and be a wonderful synergy. And the cafe space will have artist and performances and it will cement the relationship here in the civic center nep the view from at night. It will be a lively and animated use. Here you see with the articulation of the materials. Its very subtle but well crafted and carefully study in terms of energy use, energy and light. It stands half a block from city hall. 10, 20, 50 years from now well be proud of it. It will look like it came out of a style of music and orientation in a western exposure. Finally the last image looking up from van ness with the animation and life across haight street and the public is welcome there and its something to explore and for the conservatory to reach out and say to San Francisco, come on in. We want you to be part of us. Commissioner thank you. Does that conclude the presentation . Yes. Note, youll need to initiate the general plan amendment. Commissioner so were hoping this sets up Public Comment. I have a couple speaker cards. If others would like to speak, you can line up on the side of the room. Welcome. Im phoebe van derhorst and im the face of the people this will affect. I want to support the project. I feel its important the conservatory took the needs of the tenants into mind. I want to say if this doesnt go through wed be more as risk because another developer can come along and kick us out. We were very concerned. We found out about the building being sold to the conservatory in the newspaper with one of my neighbors. I went to jane kim and we discussed what we felt we needed and she came up with something supportive of the tenants. Its a highrisk building. Theres a lot of people who could never afford to live in San Francisco. Ive been here since 1956 and living in the building 16 years. I want to remain at 200 van ness until the day i lie. Die. I dont think the conservatory will be an impediment to that. I think well have nice apartments because frankly the building say dump, though i have a nice apartment, a lot of people in the building dont. The building has mice and bugs and we would get a nice place to live and a rent weve been assured our rent is going to continue to be rent controlled which is very very important to us because obviously we cant afford to pay the 4,000 and 5,000 the apartments will eventually be worth. Its really disturbing to me that a lot of other people have control over my life right now and im standing up here in front of a bunch of people who dont know me, who are going to make a decision about my future. I know my time is almost up but im going to again stress we have been dealing with this two years and dont know where were going and its stressful. We want to know when were leaving and coming back and where were going. The conservatory has been really good about that. Theyve reached out and agreed to accommodate the policies. Commissioner your time is up. I know my time sis up but please, consider getting on with this because were tired of living in limbo. Commissioner thank you very much. Next speaker please. Lois bibloiz. Im relieved to hear a tenant speaking. That was my greatest worry. The assurance will get one to one replacement in rentcontrolled apartments in the same rents they have now given the environment were living in now which is so expensive and with gentrification and displacement. Im hoping the conservatory will have legal assurances because we dont have costahawkins so i hope there will be legal agreements and assurances so these tenants can live out their lives with those implemented and i hope the conservatory will have vacancy control which is not legal right now in San Francisco because costahawkins because that will assure the whole building will affordable rent even after the current tenants leave. Thank you. Commissioner thank you. Next speaker, please. Im dray from the housing rights committee. I was equally concerned because once you demolished the units, rent control will be no longer and i want to make sure its going to be honored because it would be an opportunity for a vacancy control as well as some kind of rent control that is not possibly more city driven. Because of costahawkins all these things are up in the air and im in the sure how it will be possible but this is whats been promised and once the units are demolished they will not have rent control so if you can move it along and make sure thats within the ordinance. Thank you. Commissioner next speaker, please. Listening muse music to my ears. 420 units of student house being built is a big deal in San Francisco. Replacement of 27 units is a big deal in the city. Weve had a lot of concern about academic institutions and the impact it had on the Housing Stock of the city. Weve had hearings in the past 20 years at the Planning Commission because one doesnt care at all. And its taking up housing for their students. Weve had hope. Conservatory, golden gate, San Francisco art institute, hastings, usf, ucsf. All had come in and talked at least to the city, if not to the Planning Commission about how theyre building housing because its the only way they can survive and serve their students. Theyre being driven by their Academic Commission to serve their students. At the same time, being driven to build housing means theres relief pressure on the housing. Thats enormous. There needs to be a presentation and ill write up on the slip form a presentation on the scope of whats going on for building housing and you dont have authority over state institutions. Like hastings. Theyre doing things. Should know whats going on because its happening in your jurisdiction and its happening in dog patch. Its happening and you need a hearing and you are doing a good job but you need to okay knowledge it. We have a hearing coming in three weeks. So initiate the rezoning and come back and nail down what was talked about. Thank you. Commissioner any additional Public Comments on the item . Seeing none well close Public Comment. Commissioner koppel. Thank you. I think its a great combination of multiple usages like the activating ground floor. I like the attention paid to the existing tenants which is very important and the comments made by the director the intent is to take students that sometimes take up other Housing Units and put them in other house. Housing. Commissioner commissioner moore. I think its great to start finding that part and with the aaa building revitalized it the help bring Market Street to civic center and the art across the street. I think it couldnt be any better and it reaches over in the eastwest direction. It was a fabulous project and im excited and today were talking about the resolution to initiate the general plan and make a motion we do so and if theres any other question for comments about unit design to hold that. Ill second that. Commissioner i think we have to schedule the adoption hearing after february as part of the portion. Yes. Commissioner if so i juth we commissioner so we can suggest a date. Its on or after. Sometimes after february 8th essentially. A couple quick comments. We talked about the project before. Its great to see the organization. Ms. Hester mentioned this but being proactive in housing for students and i think the building building is multiuse. In the lay out i only see one floor for units that have designated student units. So there are 27 onsite currently. Therell be 30. 30 for faculty and 37 for the replacement housing and the rest are student units. I think those are the sorts of things that are in the development agreement. I want to say in the document it was unclear. Thank you. I wish ken rich was here because usually he gives me the dirtiest look when i say i like Site Specific projects like this. It makes me sad but you dont do the same thing and give me that look. This is a great outcome. I want to make a couple notes about the things we greed to that will happen as a result of the general plan amendment. Rent control the fact were doing onetoto one replacement is good weve had other cases where we are getting rid of rent control units for inclusionary housing which is not the same thing. I want to take this time and highlight to people its not the same thing. Inclusionary for one operates differently. Its a lottery system. And minimum use is 55 years and thats not permanent and thats something id like to take the opportunity and id like to highlight were getting oneforone replacement and im adding on stabilization of the rent for tenants. My question is, if the tenant opts not to come back is it onetoone replacement of people now or those moving back in and how is the rent set . And so there will be six studio apartments and 21 onebedroom apartments built into the building and submitted to the rental ordinance. The entire pact will be rent controlled. But theres a theres the actual rent and the agreement is theyll pay what they were paying before but if a tenant decides to move on to something else, is there anything else as far as who is setting the rent . Its subject to whatever the ordinance allows. If theres a vacant unit, it will follow whatever the rental ordinance allows. Okay. Thank you. As time goes on and people mof on and time goes on its more clear but i was trying to understand the onetime implication. Thats helpful. And i think this is a great project. Hopefully well push it forward soon. I wont restate the things my fellow commissioners have said. I love everything about this project. I love the design and architecture and thoughtfulness of the performing spaces. The deals that were for the tenants. I think its all great. I was going to comment on how wonderful it is to see the civic center arts synergy happening and theres a couple things missing. I was a girls chorus mom so im familiar of what happens around christmas time and Opening Night for the opera between all the different institutions and artists going back and forth and performances happening. It is magical to be in that space and i think it will add to it and once the school of the art is opened, it will be a fantastic place for young people artists and youth to be immersed in the richness of the art scene. Imy glad to see this happening and how thoughtful youve been and thank you staff so im fully supportive of the project. Thank you. I look forward to this coming back in february and seeing the details of the d. A. Our conversation has been dominated as far as schools with one particular school so its nice to see another come forward. We know theres challenges out there in finding space for students and institutions competing for other uses so its refreshing to see a creative deal being worked out and i know its tough to design a building on the corridor adjacent to city hall. An applaud you on that and i look forward to coming back with more detail on the d. A. It was great to hear from ms. Van derhorst and glad youre reaching out and communicating to existing tenants. Commissioner commissioner richards this is how to deal with tenants when youre proposing construction. I think theres been one or two of these things in the past. This remarkable and its a winwin and i completely support this. Commissioner we have a motion and a second. Commissioner theres a motion to second the plan amendment and schedule it after february meeting. Commissioner koppel, commissioner moore. Commission commissioner richards. The motion passes unanimously 60. It places us on items 15a. Its a conditional use authorization and therell be a consideration of request for variance. Im presenting a request for conditioning use authorization and variance at 749 27th street. I have a request for conditional use authorization to allow the alteration and additions to a singleuse family home and seeks a variance from the planning coat pursuant to section 13 2. Its between diamond and douglas streets. The property has 50 feel of frontage on the south side of 27th street is 114th street and slopes upward toward the rear. Its developed with two singlefamily dwellings. The first building is 30 feet in width and depth totalling 1,448 of square feet and constructed in 1980. The rear building is a onestory approximately 1,204 square foot building. Theres one curb cut on the east side which allows for parking in front of the rear house. Its located in the rh1 zoning district. The adjacent property to the west is developed with a onestory singlefamily home and encroached on the subject property by one foot. The proposed project is to allow for an existing twostory home of approximately 1,500 square feet at the front and create an approximately fourstory, approximately 3,581 square foot, single home dwelling with one car garage and seeks to allow the expansion and alteration of the structure to occur at the existing building. It sets back four feet from the front Property Line and has a required setback of 15 feet. Therefore a variance is required to allow for the expansion of the building within the required front yard. The project includes the alteration and detachment of the rear story and result in 1,329 square feet. No expansion of the building is proposed in the rear yard and therefore theres no intensification of the encroachment. In existing curb cut that provides offstreet parking on the east side is proposed to be removed and the existing driveway will be replace with landscaping. A new curb cut is proposed at the front house to provide vehicle access to that buildings proposed twocar garage. When comment letters in opposition to the project had been received at the time of the publishing. One was from the adjacent letter to the west and since then theres been two letters in opposition to the project including a revised letter from the neighbor to the west and one in support. Staff recommends the approval to allow the tantamount of demolition to the Single Family residence. This concludes staff presentation. Im available if have you questions. Thank you. Project sponsor. Hi, my name is doug shawn. Thank you for meeting with me, commissioners. So ive provided some drawings here. Im the designer of the building. I had designed a few houses up on diamond street a couple years back and they had approached me and asked me if id redesign their home at 749 27th street. They told me their house was badly outdated and in bad shape and too confining for them for their multigenerational family and want a home that is modern, Energy Efficient and comfortable. Linors bedroom is the size of a closet. I have clean lines. The surface is lowmaintenance stucco with corrugated aluminum on the inserts. In terms of what i gave to you looking at exhibit one, it shows the existing site plan of the existing condition of the front and rear house. Theres two houses on the property. The front was built in 1937 by her father and the rear house was built its hard to tell when. Its almost 30 feet wide and three and a half feet from the side yard so it totals 34 feet the western property and it is four feet, four inches from the front Property Line. Since her family has been and will be residing on the property for a very long time, we came up with a longterm plan to use the property in a way that allows for growth while at the same time conforms to the character of neighborhood. Most houses are 25 feet wide and almost all are near the front Property Line. Since her property is 50 feet wide, it made sense to us to build in 25 footwide increments. If you look at the second exhibit here and lop up a portion of the rear side and the west side of that, we would create a place to have two 25foot wide houses. It seemed to make more sense to rebuild the front house and keep it in the 25foot footprint. As soon as we do that its tantamount to demolition. Were cutting away too much. Well keep the main floor of the house and portions of the wall and assuming the variance were asking for, wed like to be able to keep it near the front of the house where it is now. If you look at the thats what youll see on exhibit three. In blue is where the new house would go. On the smaller house, theres a proposed addition at the front. You can see in exhibit 4, the proposed house is only going to be seven foot, four inches higher than the existing house. I want to give them time to talk also. And i think we have good reasons. Its one of the original houses on the block. There were virtually no houses in 1937 so historically were maintaining the house as it has been and conforms in a similar profile to the houses and the surrounding neighborhoods in terms of the 25foot width we are proposing and keeping the house at the same location at the front minimizes the amount of excavation. It is a hillside in terms of keeping it back and keep it where it is and will minimize the amount of excavation required and keep a nicer, bigger back yard. And if we can keep it to the front, it will create more separation with 761 27th street, and i had a meeting were of with her and at the time of the preapplication meeting she was more concerned thered be no windows and we put them in on the west side of the house. Her only other comment had to do with the impact of light it. Comes from the south. The size wouldnt have an overall affect. Ill have you hear from the owner. Good evening, commissioners. Im happy to be here today. Im linor long and i work parttime at the opera house, davy Symphony Hall and the palace. My grandparents and their three children came so San Francisco from wales in the mid 1920s and bought the property which was at that time 87x124 square feet and had two cottages in the rear of the property. When the grandparents decide to move to the east cottage, the land was divided into two lots. The cottage on the west side was sold to mr. Aultz and the 15x14 lot was a gift to my mother and father. At 22 years of age my father built the house we are now living on. It was the first to be built on 27th street according to the new code requiring the homes to be built up against the sidewalk. I am part of a history of this neighborhood and the only original resident still living on our block. My strongest desire is to continue to live in my new home with my daughter and grandchildren and see the sixth and seven generation of long as to enjoy what my parents willed to me. I hope with all my heart that you will understand that the house that was built during the depression, with limited funds truly needs an upgraded remodel. I have looked forward to living in better conditions and to feel safe and secure in a modernized house. I thank you for your time and letting me express myself. Commissioner thank you. Thank you. Im linors daughter and my three kids are here too. Theyre fifth generation in our family. Were residing at 749 27th street. My grandma passed in the house and during the time we were caring for her it was impossible to make any repairs. Since her passing, my mom and i had to tackle these difficult and dire remarries. Repairs. Its a small house we all share but big problems. Electric and plumbing has not been updated since 1937 and in terrible shape. Last year the water pipe burst and dramatic repairs have to be made. Every year we also have to endure the bad rains. There are terrible leaks and we have termites in the house and weve decided that its time for us to invest in our home and build for the long haul. Weve been inspired by the beautiful new homes on our block especially the ones on diamond street. Commissioner thank you very much. Well open the item up for Public Comment. Any Public Comment on good afternoon, commissioners. My only Public Comment with the project is that i understand these homes are old, archaic, they need upgrade and i understand the multigenerations living on the lot. Its actually commendable. I do have a multigeneration living situation myself. But i do believe the scale of this project is too massive and especially for an rh1 home its going to set a precedent on the block and we dont need massive homes. Time and again you have mentioned we do need more housing but then not more massive housing. Thats my only Public Comment. Ive also heard back and forth between the neighbor on the west side and the subject Property Owner regarding the one foot in contention. I want to remind you there is a thing at risk possession law from about what i understand, if something has been built on somebody elses lot for so many years its not necessarily deserving to wreck their home to possess that piece of land that was my mistake taken. I just wanted to make a comment on that also. Thats it. Thank you. Commissioner any additional Public Comment on the item . Seeing none well close Public Comment. Commissioner richards. Commissioner we have an extra higher level of scrutiny when we have demolitions because of the relative affordability of the existing Housing Stock versus new construction. We all know new construction in the neighborhood goes for 1200 a square foot, 1300 a square foot. Cheap junky new construction at least 1,000 a square foot. Under the criteria, number ix9, whether the project protect the relative affordability of existing house, it doesnt. I have a couple questions. I think there may be a misunderstanding. We have a nonconforming two structures on the same lot. Those, according to my understanding of the ordinance are rent controlled. Theyre considered singlefamily yet the report on page 6 and 7 are saying theyre not under rent control. Thats my understanding as well. I think thats a staff error. So were demolishing a rent control unit. Its an alteration. This is not a demolition permit. This is an alteration under the department of building inspection. The definition, mr. Sanchez, is the demolition retention of principle parts. We have very specific numerical cry tear y criteria and this is processing this as an alteration permit. My understanding is its more stringent. If i want to knock it down its twothirds and ours is 50 . So were exceeding their threshold . Its more stringent than the building department. One we deal for preservation for historic structure and one for 317 and the 317 is what theyre violating. So though its under an alteration permit its not demolishing a rentcontrolled unit. Its not demolition under the building code. Ultimately theyd have to have it not be rent controlled. As demolition its new construction and not subject to rent control but an alteration is a demolition and under the planning code, its my information theyd have to go to the rent board and undo rent control. The assumption is its rent control but theyd have to got board and make the arguments. [please stand by] pap [please stand by] one for each house instead of calling it as multi family buildings. So when the application that the shortterm rental office received, it met the requirements of allowing the entire unit to be shortterm rated even though its a separate building. Its like a flat. Wright. Where you can only rent out portions that you live in that building whereas you can right. So they rented out the entire house and that wasnt allowed. They went through the process just like rent control even though it looks like a Single Family house. It was an loud except they could only rent they did more on the 30 days. There was a second incident where an advertisement was found offering it for less than 30 days, which resulted in that second and still currently opened enforcement case. I think enforcement cases stay open for about a year to allow for further monitoring. So what happened to that second one . So they i resolved whatever issue with our enforcement shortterm rental enforcement rental staff. That case is still open purely for the purpose of monitoring the year of review started again when they had that second enforcement case. Commissioner i would like to ask mr. Sanchez regarding why we would even consider that this building could not have to meet the current front yard setback. Given that under the planning code to which we are under we are looking at this project, we are the Planning Commission. Why wouldnt we expect this building to really do what it needs to do and not grant a front set back and build a building which i consider completely oversized. The second building on the lot which is to be enlarged in the future and there is nothing in front of us right now already shows desired expansion towards the front where normally the resident that weve got Design Guidelines and i have to use it as a skip forward. She speaks about clearer separation and meeting of common lines rather than engaging as it would in the plans proposed. So getting back to my original question, why wouldnt we hold this project to just what everybody else needs to do if you do a tandem on to the demolition which is a demolition for our definition. If i start from scratch and build a building at the front setback line that everybody has to a boy to as well. Certainly the commission has full discretion as to what is to be approved on the site, but i think a couple factors to consider with regards to the front set back issue which they are seeking a variance is first, it is an existing condition that existed there for some time. There is some other pattern on the block of buildings that do come this far out to the front Property Line. Its not a prevailing pattern, but there are other buildings on the block face that do so. Further, setting it back from the street and complying with the front set back requirement will require additional demolition of the building, which may if it does come down to a complete demolition permit, would arguably complicate the rent control question whereas now, its an alteration and its our understanding that it would still be they would have to go to the rent board to undo the rent control. They would have to petition the rent board for it to no longer be subject to rent control if it is a demolition. Its not even a question because then theyre getting a completely new building at that point. And lastly, the adjacent building, the one on the subject lot isnt complying. The adjacent building is also not complying to the rear and as the project architect noted, it allows them to push it to the front and provide situation between the structures. Those are factors that could be required, but the commission does full have discretion to decide. Im concerned that we are, again, being forced to look an extremely oversize building. Oversized building. Were going from 1448 square feet to 3581 square feet. Its a huge increase on a lot that has a capacity deeper than most. However, since theres really not a neighborly gesture relative to what historically has happened in other lots that the garage of the adjoining building would have to be removed, im having a really hard time with this project. This project, by architectural design, by building expression, by size, by variance on set back has too many things without doing enough for me. I think the building is too tall. The 4th floor is highly inappropriate. I think it is just too big. I repeat, were not looking at the expansion of the second building, but that he expresn is equally we have two properties on one lot. So i will leave this out here. Im not particularly comfortable with whats in front of us. Just curious what everybody else has to say. So this is an interesting case because its a 50foot lot. I think from the site design, i like that theyre converting this back as if it were 225 by i believe these are 100 feet. Theyre 114foot lots. I think thats kicking it into a tantamount demolition like you said. Youre removing kind of a side of the home to allow for the kind of the structure thats on 27th street, the new home, kind of the typical 25foot lot. So i think the program here works. I think im fine with the program. Theres obviously a large family that youre trying to accommodate in the main home, and then theres a second home in the rear. I like the discussion that this is not a demolition under the building code, so its only the tantamount under our code. So the rent control provisions should prevail. I kind of agree on the front. It could use, you know, softening to make it i dont know if its so it will feel less bulky on that building. There are some others like this on 27th street that have kind of the large kind of how things work