Transcripts For SFGTV Historic Preservation Commission 20240712

Hearings remotely. On may 29, 2020, the Mayors Office authorized all commissions to reconvene remotely. We request your patience in advance. The merged platforms are not perfect, and at times may even be clumsy. There are broadcast delays from the live event to sfgovtv, and the live event to those who are streamed, streaming the event live. I have been notified that sfgovtv is not currently broadcasting the event live on television. Again, members of the public may stream it live via their website and links. They will broadcast our hearing as soon as the Building Inspection Commission hearing concludes. To enable the public participation, sfgovtv will end up broadcasting, but it is streaming this hearing live and we will receive Public Comment for each item to todays agenda. The tollfree number to enter the hearing and to submit Public Comment is available by calling 1 888 2733658. Enter access code 3107452. And then press pound, and pound again. When you are connected and you would like to submit Public Comment for an item on the agenda press 1 and then 0 to be added into the queue. Each member of the public will be allowed up to three minutes. When you have 30 seconds remaining you will hear a chime indicating that your time is almost up. When your allotted time is reached, i will announce that your time is up and direct my staff to go to the next person to speak. Best practices are to call from a quiet location and speak clearly and slow she and mute your television ore computer. At this time id like to take roll. roll call . Clerk commissioner foley, are you on . I believe that commissioner foley and commissioner black are having technical difficulties in joining us. If our team could reach out to them and try to send them a new link to join the hearing i would appreciate that. Commissioners, first on your agenda is the general Public Comment. At this time the members of the public may address on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter of the agenda items. Your opportunity is afforded when the item is reached in the meeting and each member may address up to three minutes. Why dont we go ahead and open the Public Comment portion through the at t bridge. Your conference is now in questionandanswer mode. To summon each question press 1, and then 0. Clerk the members of the public this is, again your opportunity to call into the 800 number and to the access code and then press 1, and 0 to enter the queue. You have two questions remaining. Caller hi, good afternoon, commissioners. This is katherine howard. The San Francisco chronicle ran an investigative study on june 7th called how is San Francisco is indiscernible and it describes actions that they took under the california indiscernible act. And they have considered exemptions for at least a dozen projects on stateidentified toxic waste sites and the city exempted nine of these projects with the state Environmental Review process. Im very concerned with how this kind of misuse might be afforded by the new ceqa ordinance with the standard. The ordinance is implemented and the result would be that even more projects would be made exempt from public review under ceqa. It was to enact anxiouses to document and to consider the environmental implications their actions, and the Environmental Review process that is involved in the process by which a public gave input to public agencies on projects and policies. By limiting the Environmental Reviews with the proposed ordinance to have a negative impact on transparency and public participation. Of course we all hope that the past uses outlined in the article are not predictive of future problems. But i am concerned that the ordinance could cause more abuse of the public trust in the future. As you commissioners are aware, the ordinance will be reviewed on july 15th. I encourage you and the listening public to read the june 7th chronicle article and please reconsider and do not further weaken the ceqa process in San Francisco. Thank you very much. You have two questions remaining. Caller commissioners, good afternoon. I will be speaking later during another matter, but i just wanted to take this time to publicly to recognize jonas. I have hosted many Virtual Meetings during these trying times and i know that at times that it can feel like youre herding cats. Having watched jonas performance, your hearings as well as the general Planning Commission, i think that its done a spectacular job of maintaining order and getting as much of a semblance of a normal hearing during these trying times. You have one question remaining. Caller hello, my name is richard blockman and i am here talking about w. T. A. Murals. Im sure that the Commission Read about what they want to do with the murals at the hall. While i know they dont have any jurisdiction, i would hope that the commission would have a hearing on it. And i have murals. I have some of the murals at my website richardrossman. Com and its important to shed a light on these murals and see how beautiful they are. They need to be saved. In the indiscernible i spoke last august about this. I talked to the staff and they said they would prepare a hearing. The last i heard was in february. And thats when this happened. And i just want to urge the commission that they should have a hearing and should make this building a city landmark. Its already a national landma landmark. A. I. G. Did an extensive report on it, all of the material is ready to present to the commission. It just has to be put in the right format. And we need to shed light on the building and to make sure that its preserved and we need to make sure that its considered a landmark. Thank you for your time. You have zero questions remaining. Clerk very good, commissioners. That concludes our general Public Comment portion of the hearing. Placing us under department matters, for item 1, directors announcements. Jeff, any ahouse inments on behalf of director hills . No, jonas, i do not have a report from the director this week. Clerk item 2, review the staff report and announcements. I will only note that last week the Planning Commission adopted a resolution centering the departments efforts on racial and social equity. And i believe that there will be further commentary on that under commission matters. See if jeff has no additional announcements or Staff Reports we can move on to item 23, president s report and announcements. I have no reporter on announcements. Clerk very good. Item 4, krrgdz of the draft minutes for may 6, 2020. We should open this up for Public Comment. Your conference is in questionandanswer mode to summon each question press 1 and then 30. Clerk i remind the members of the public this is your opportunity to call the 800 number and press 1, 0, to enter the queue. While we wait for that, commissioner . I have a few things or should i wait jonas has people on the line. Should i do this now about the resolution . Or what do you recommend . Clerk were on a minute right now. So once we get into the next item you can vicepresident matsuda okay, sorry. Clerk you can speak to that. President hyland are there any Public Comments . There are no callers. President hyland commissioners, any comments on our minutes or a motion for approval. I move that we approve them. Second. Clerk seeing no further comments, we adopt on that motion. Commissioner black. Yes. Im sorry, commissioner foley is still experiencing technical issues. Commissioner johns. Yes. Commissioner pearlman. Yes. Commissioner so. Yes. Commissioner matsuda. Yes. And Commission President hyland. Yes, that passes unanimously 60. I would want to remind staff and the commissioners if youre not speaking to mute your microphones. We seem to get a lot of static in the background and dogs barking, for that matter. Commissioners, that will place us under 5 item 5, commission comments and questions. I believe that commissioner matsuda was requesting the floor. Vicepresident matsuda yes, sorry. Its me with the dog. And i will try to see if i can calm him down. I have a couple of questions and comments. But, first, things that i would like to have the commissioner to consider sorry last thursday on june 11th, the San Francisco Planning Commission requested the Planning Department staff to prepare a resolution for them to consider centering on the Planning Departments work Program Related to social and Racial Equity. And i am requesting that our commissioners, the commissioners of the h. B. C. To consider doing something very similar to this. It is quite a long document. In its entirety its 10 pages and its very good and the executive summary just talks about the things that they would like to encourage the Planning Department to do. As many of you know that we have as a Commission Approved or anticipating the racial and social equity plan and this week is it this week i cant remember last friday commissioner hyland and i joined a call with several Planning Commissioners to talk more about this. And just about how we could proceed in general. And how we could Work Together with not only the Planning Commission but with other commissioners to make sure that we create a program and that we create very clear i think Institutional Reforms to go with social and Racial Equity. So i would like to request that the Planning Department staff to create a similar resolution, focusing on things that the h. B. C. Should include in their resolutions, or parts of this resolution that clearly pertain to Planning Commission matters, but i think that there are very specific things that pertain to the h. B. C. Matters. And i would be happy to provide that information or provide suggestions for the Planning Department staff. So thats number one to ask for the commissions consideration. Number two, its my understanding that the city and county of San Francisco staff will not return back to their offices. And im not sure if that was for the fiscal year or for the calendar year and i just wanted to know if anybody had any comment on that. The third thing, should i stop jonas, i am asking to you answer that. Clerk i can quickly respond to that. The City Administrators Office has essentially directed staff that are able to continue working w remotely and to expect to do so to july 2021. Vicepresident matsuda 2021, wow. Clerk so essentially another year of remote work from home. And as much as i personally believe that we will be able to reoccupy offices sooner, i remain optimistic at least in that regard. I think that theyre simply preparing for the long haul with remote work. Vicepresident matsuda so what does that mean for us . Clerk im not sure. Because it doesnt speak to commissions, it doesnt speak to reoccupying city hall, it doesnt speak to Commission Hearings. Its really directed at staff reoccupying city offices. And i think that they are remaining extremely cautious given our pandemic. And the Health Issues associated with it. So quite understandably, but, again, i believe it to be a mental preparation for staff to just sort of get in that mindset. We will be all hopefully be sooner than that. Vicepresident matsuda okay, thank you. I was not hoping for that answer, but, thank you. And then just kind of continuing on, yesterday president hyland forwarded me some information about a free webinar that the California Preservation Foundation had on state historic tax credits. And it was very good. But i was hoping that maybe we could get somebody from the Planning Department staff to give us at the h. B. C. A more further overview or a more further information on how it would specifically pertain to us here in the city and county of San Francisco. I know thats a low priority, but i just want to put it out there that i think that this is a great opportunity. I mean, i didnt realize that it took so long from start to finish to get this done. And i just dont want us to forget about it here in San Francisco. And then the third thing is we president hyland and i had a webinar or a zoom call yesterday with two members from the office of Small Business as well as paul long from the supervisor ronens office about the legacy business program. And i guess that well discuss that later with that agenda item. Thats all. Thank you. President hyland thank you, commissioner matsuda. And i just echo that the weak wr was worthwhile and its available and its recorded on the Foundation Website if you would like to watch it. Its the save california historic tax credit. And one item of note for us in San Francisco is that its a 20 tax credit with an additional 5 for Affordable Housing projects. So we might end up seeing quite a bit of it in the near future. Commissioner so, did you want to did you have an item or to respond to something that commissioner matsuda said . Commissioner so i do have an item that id like to bring up and then i want to also respond to commissioner matsudas item. And first let me respond to the commission matsudas item. I am fully in support with the Racial Equity resolution drafting, and im really think that this is very important, especially where we are at right now for us to really take another step forward and be actively advocating to do what we can do in our jurisdictions, in our responsibilities. So, thank you for suggesting that. And thank you for your time, commissioner matsuda and commissioner hyland, to have these meetings in collaboration with our fellow Planning Commissioners. And the new item that id like to bring up is the. And understanding that it is a ucff jurisdiction but id like to bring up that those artists is very significant in our local community, in our history of fabrics and also depicting the history of medicine. Especially applying to the context of San Francisco and california. And i really hope to see perhaps id like to see the staff could reach out to get a better understanding of what we can do to facilitate in different matters of preserving it or even if theres a part that is unreservable and how we could continue to make sure that the next the virtual versions of preservation of these murals theres 10 of them, from my understanding it is really truly representing the essence of what our future generation could be. I would like to just get a better understanding where we are and what we could do about that matter. Thats all i wanted to bring up to all of you. Thank you. President hyland great, thank you. Commissioner black, did you want to speak to matsuda commissioner black yes, i just want to say that i support her recommendations that we adopt a resolution. I think thats a very Important Role for us to provide. I support it. President hyland then mr. Johns did you have anything to speak to . Commissioner johns yes. Staff would be happy to work with the Commission Towards the developing resolution. In fact, the recent events and actions that have affected us all have triggered a number of discussions among staff and preservation staff specifically about ways in which the Preservation Program might engage these issues. So well begin work on central resolutions, assuming that is the general will of the commission. President hyland great. Thank you. Commissioner johns . Commissioner johns yeah, i just wanted to to say to commissioner black that i think that commissioner matsudas recommendation is something that we definitely should do. President hyland great. Thank you. So maybe ill work with in regard to the murals and the project, i will work with staff and see if someone will reach out to the ucff. They do bring their projects before us as a courtesy. So maybe its an option here. But it would be a clerk president hyland, they do have an e. I. R. Associated with the project that is reviewed by the department so there may be an opportunity for the Historic Preservation commission to deliberate on the manner through that process. But that would be really the only avenue. Theyre outside of our jurisdiction. I would also like to remind members of the commission that the chat room is really intended for a request to speak and not to converse. So if you could delete your entries, that would be great. If there are no other items, commissioner matsuda, a motion to direct staff to add a resolution for your consideration regarding social equity on your next Meeting Agenda . Vicepresident matsuda yes, it is a motion. Clerk do i hear a second . Second. Clerk thank you, commissioners on. That motion then to direct staff to draft a resolution for your consideration regarding racial and social equity and add to your agenda next week, commissioner black. Yes. Commissioner johns. Yes. Commissioner pearlman. Yes. Commissioner so. Yes. Commissioner matsuda, yes. And president hyland. Yes. President hyland and i see that commissioner foley just joined us. Clerk excellent. Welcome. Clerk welcome commissioner foley. Commissioner foley thank you, team. Clerk so that passes unanimously 60. Commissioner foley you were absent during the deliberations so well move to the next item. And actually were on commission comments and questions if you wanted to add anything, commissioner foley, before we leave that. Commissioner foley i finally got Technology Working but, thank you very much. Clerk very good. Well, if you heard it and you were participating audibly through the hearing i will ask for your vote regarding the resolution to support the departments effort regarding racial and social equity. On ma motion, commissioner foley. Yes. Clerk so were unanimous 70. President hyland for that. One of the most important things that we talk about. Clerk commissioners that will place us on item 6 for the letter supporting the legacy business program. This is for your adoption. Thank you, jonas. Shelly, did you want to speak . Shelly drafted a letter and i hope that the other commissioners were able to review that letter. We have a letter also from s. F. Heritage. That you have hopefully been able to see that as well. Shelly, did you want to speak to your letter . Sure. I didnt prepare a presentation but i wanted to note that im here and that i am happy to take any notes on amendments that you might have to the letter and i will then finalize the letter for revow and we will send it on to the mayor and copied on it. To briefly summarize the content, this was based on your conversations from the may sixth period in which we provided an update on the legacy business Registry Program. And so we summarized your recommendations to the Mayors Office in the letter beginning with a recommendation that we have the commission to be allowed to resume hearing legacy business registry applications as soon as possible. And that we have an Economic Task force to consider the Registry Program as a venue or a mechanism for delivering services as they prepare their plans. Lastly, that we wanted to note that in any aid programs that the mayor is able to lend to the legacy business program. We went to the most vulnerable communities suffering from this pandemic, and due to the shelterinplace on businesses and on districts 5, 10 and 11 in specific. And if you have anything to add to the draft, ill take notes now and can read back to you at the end of your discussion. Thanks. President hyland great, thank you, shelly. Commissioner matsuda . Vicepresident matsuda yes, thank you. So as i briefly mentioned under commissioner comments, we president hyland and i had the opportunity to have a conversation with paul mung from supervisor ronens office as well as the members of the office of Small Business yesterday. And one of the things that was suggested is that, shelly, we add as entities or as individuals are to receive a copy of this letter to the office of workforce and economic development, as he is in charge of the resiliency indiscernible that are going out to Small Businesses. And to maybe have a conversation with him in the near future about making legacy businesses a priority would be the Mini Grants Program if another round is to happen. The second one is to the cochair of the covid19 Recovery Task force, shes one of the several cochairs so i recommend that we address a carbon copy to all cochairs to that committee. And then also, again, to paul mung of supervisor ronens office, as you all know that supervisor david campos was the kind of the creator of the legacy business and supervisor ronen i think was the staff person at that time and continues to make legacy business a very high priority within her administration. Or within her reign. And so we want to make sure that we continue to keep her and her office involved. Thats all. Thank you. President hyland great, thank you. Jonas, do we take Public Comment on this. Is there anyone from the public that wants to give input. Well do that. Clerk why dont we go ahead your conference is in questionandanswer mode. To summon each question press 1 and then 0. Clerk i remind the members of the public to hit 1, and then 0 to enter the cue. You have one question remaining. Caller hello, this is woody lavante from San Francisco heritage. I wanted to thank you for writing this letter and shelly for putting all of those points into it so well. And i also encourage you to send it on to talk to joaquin, who we directed our letter to. And i really do like this idea of trying to prioritize certain districts. Its a great addition to the letter and thank you for your attention to this. Clerk thank you. You have zero questions remaining. Clerk very good, commissioners that. Concludes the Public Comment portion. The matter is now before you. President hyland okay. So a couple comments and if we could San Francisco heritage as it is called now wrote a letter and they had one item that is not in our letter. And that was to prioritize maybe mention this item the grants. So we would need to add a sentence in one of these paragraphs, the third paragraph possibly, to ask the mayor and staff to prioritize legacy business in the future grant programs. And i would propose that we actually address the letter to mayor breed as well as mr. Torres as well as the economic Recovery Task force. So that all three would be addressed in the letter and not just a c. C. If that would work. So do we need a motion to do this . Clerk we need a motion to adopt, yes. I will make the motion. Second. President hyland very good, commissioners. Theres nor furthe no further d. Theres a motion [broken audio] to be read into the record by the commissioners. Clerk commissioner black. Yes. Commissioner foley. Yes. Commissioner johns. Yes. Commissioner pearlman. Yes, commissioner so. Yes. Commissioner matsuda. Yes. And Commission President hyland. Yes. So moved, commissionersthat. Passes unanimously, 70. And so under the items for continuous, 2018009197coa 1772 vallejo street, for continuous to july 2020, and case eight, 556560 scott street for continuous to july 15, 2020. And item 9, case 20190177767des for the lake street landmark district. And its pr proposed for an indefinite continuous. Wcontinuance. We should take Public Comments for items for continuance. Your conference is now in questionandanswer mode. To summon each question press 1 and then 0. Clerk again, members of the public, this is your opportunity to enter the queue by pressing 1, and then 0. You have one question remaining. Caller commissioner, i disagree with the request for the lake street landmark districts continuance. Although it appears that the Planning Department staff agrees that sanot ready for primetime and this is informational presentation only, the project sponsors have been not forthright and not inviting all affected neighbors to participate in informational sessions for the neighborhood. And have only invited those that seem to be agreeing with them. And i would like to have the commission to use this time so that they can at least inform the rest of us who thought that this was going to be heard today to provide us with information about the project. If the commission chooses to grant the continuance, we respectfully request that they instruct the Planning Department staff to hold Neighborhood Outreach at staff request as opposed to the project sponsors request and so that all neighbors can participate and the commissions time is not wasted further. You have zero questions remaining. Clerk very good, commissioners. The items for continuance are before you. President hyland any comments or questions or do we have a motion . We move to accept the continuance calendar. Second. President hyland and well definitely work with the staff on the community outreach. Just to respond to the Public Comment. Clerk theres a motion that is seconded to continue items as proposed. On that motion commissioner black. Commissioner black, you may be muted. Commissioner black sorry. Yes, sorry. Clerk thank you. Commissioner foley. Yes. Commissioner johns. Yes. Commissioner pearlman. Yes. Commissioner so. Yes. Commissioner matsuda. Yes. Commission president hyland. Yes. So moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 70. And placing under your consent calendar and you have one item on consent, item 10 for case 2015014170coa02 at 804806 22nd street, and we have received a request to move this off consent and through the chair we will take it off of consent. And place it at the first item under your regular calendar. So well go now to your regular calendar for item 10 case number 2015014170coa02 804806, 22 could street. Can staff present . Yes, can commissioners hear me . Clerk we can. The Department Staff here on behalf of monica giacomucci. This is modifications approved by the Historic Preservation community in their public hearing as approved in 0392. And as part of the review of this project, a discretionary review was filed by the by a member of the public, and it was heard by the Planning Commission on march on may 7, 2020. The Planning Commission required a revision to the project to reduce the rear addition by five feet and set it back from the rear Property Line. Therefore, i revised with appropriateness as required in order to approve the project fully and to move it forward from planning to the department of building inspection. This concludes my presentation and im happy to answer any questions. Thank you. President hyland thank you. Clerk i are you ready to make a presentation . Project sponsor . You may need to perhaps unmute yourself. This is mark, the architecture for the project. Clerk you have five minutes. Okay, we have complied with the Planning Commissions requirements to remove the rear five feet of the proposed the originally proposed project. This reduced a deck area that was to be on top of a onestorey addition that would have originally provided or proposed full lot coverage for the commercial use of the ground floor which the zoning permits. The project was revised to sit five feet away from the rear Property Line in the adjacent neighbor, the d. R. Applicants property. And we have complied with the Planning Commissions requirements under the d. R. Orders and removed the last five feet of the building and have maintained the remaining roof deck area to the project. We have a diagram that i think that could be pulled up which shows a privacy screen that originally had been proposed when the original design was adjacent to the d. R. Applican applicants indiscernible which would have been provided for privacy. That privacy screen was no longer required as we were now five feet away from the rear property and, furthermore, if it was to have been maintained, which hopefully the diagram will indicate that if we could get it on the screen, which shows that the yellow areas still would permit now with the screen and the whole building five feet away from the rear Property Line, would still permit views to the light well. So the screen is really serving no purpose. And so the screen has, thus, been removed. We have proposed a required 42inch high guardrail along the back of the deck area. And we feel as does the planning staff that we are in compliance, again, with the Planning Commissions directive. Thats pretty much concludes my presentation. Thank you. Clerk very good, thank you. We should open up for Public Comment. You are now in questionandanswer mode to summon each question press 1 and then 0. Clerk again, members of the public, this is your opportunity to get into queue by pressing 1, and 0. You have one question remaining. Caller hi. Good afternoon, members of the commission. Can you hear me . Clerk we can. Caller great. My name is Cheryl Hoffman and im the attorney for the neighbor indiscernible and who was forced to have this discretionary review. She requested d. R. With concerns about privacy and light blockage, and it would have been adjacent to her light wellbeing seen from the bedroom windows. And its a primary source of light. And the bedrooms and bathrooms for the property. And the Planning Commission agreed with her concerns and required the rear horizontal extension to be pulled back by five feet from the Property Line. However, in a revised project plans, the project sponsor has also removed the proposed walls and the sixfoot high privacy screen on the second store deck instead of proposing a 32inch high rail. And this creates privacy impacts on both properties. Theres a barrier between the rear deck and the windows which are just five feet of the edge of the back deck. The Planning Commission did not require or authorize the project sponsor to make this change. So we are asking that the railing to be replaced with appropriate privacy screens as was initially proposed. In the alternative, it was considered to be outside the h. B. C. s purview and we ask that the conditions of approval to be revised to make it clear that the open railings at the rear of the project can be revised without the indiscernible . And to Work Together to find a solution for this issue without worrying about whether were going to have the subject sponsor to further indiscernible . The rear railings are not part of the historic structure and are not visible from the street. We consider that the staff review if these changes should be sufficient. And we circulated in a letter to suggest language for this position and we are happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much for your consideration. You have zero questions remaining. Clerk very good, commissioners. That concludes the public portion of the hearing. The matter is now before you. Presidencommissioner pearlma . I think that youre on mute. Commissioner pearlman, you are muted. Commissioner pearlman sorry. I found that call to be a little strange because we got an email from the neighbor who i believe that filed the d. R. Saying that she was in support of the project and now we have this particular attorney who says that the attorney for that same person saying that they have some objection. I think that its completely out of our purview. Something that definitely just needs to be handled by staff and there is no change to the historic character and issues in this project. So i make a motion to approve this project for the c. O. A. With conditions. Second the motion. Clerk if theres nothing further, commissioners, theres a motion to approve with conditions. On that motion, commissioner black . Yes. Commissioner foley. Yes. Commissioner johns. Yes. Commissioner pearlman. Yes. Commissioner so. Yes. Commissioner matsuda. Yes. And Commission President hyland. Yes. So moved commissioners, the motion passes unanimously, 70. And that places us on item 1 for case number 2015013876pta at 207 powell street. This is a certificate of appropriateness. Is the staff prepared to present . Yes. Good afternoon, commissioners. Alex westhoff, Department Staff. The item before you is a request for a permit to alter for the property at 207 powell street. A contributor within the article 11 conservation district. And located in the Downtown Retail zoning district. And the building was constructed in 1906 by architect william loser of the Howard Building and the proposal includes a three feet height extension of the existing rooftop elevator shaft to match the finish and materials of corrugated metal siding. No other work is proposed through this scope. No members of the public have expressed support or opposition to the project. Staff have determined that the proposed work will be in compliance with article 11 of the planning code and the secretary of the interior standards. And staff, therefore, recommends approval and this concludes my presentation and that theres a short presentation to be made. Clerk very good, sponsor. Are you prepared to make a presentation . Public sponsor . You may need to hit star, 6, to unmute your telephone. Do we have a presentation to share . Yes. Would you like me to share it. Clerk go ahead and share your screen while the sponsor tries to overcome his technical difficulty. Okay. Clerk project sponsor . Is the project sponsor prepared to make their presentation . If not, Commission President hyland, if i may suggest that we go to Public Comment until the sponsor returns to make their presentation. President hyland sure. Clerk great. Opening it up for Public Comment. Your conference is now in questionandanswer mode to summon each question, press 1 and then 0. Clerk members of the public, this is your opportunity to get into the queue by entering 1, and then 0. Do we not have anyone in the queue . Very good. It appears though that mr. Hacker is having some technical difficulties. I think that you had him on the line previously so lets go to commission deliberation. Sure, if i could start and i am not sure that we need a presentation from the sponsor. I think its a pretty straightforward project and i think that the packet that we have received was sufficient in my opinion for immediate support for this. Are there any other commissioners that would like to comment on this item . I dont see any. So i want a motion to approve . Approve. Second. Second. Clerk thank you, commissioners. On that motion to approve with conditions, commissioner black . Yes. Commissioner foley. Yes. Commissioner johns. Yes, commissioner pearlman. Yes. Commissioner so. Yes. Commissioner matsuda. Yes. And Commission President hyland. Yes. Thank you, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 70. And places us on item 12 for case number 2017004557env, at 550ofarrell street, this is a Draft Environmental Impact report for your review and comment. Is staff prepared to make a presentation . Yes, we are. Clerk great. And, commissioners, this is the first time that jennifer has made a presentation in front of this commission. So we did want to introduce her. Jennifer kel joined the Planning Department as an environmental planner and originally from canada. Jennifer completed undergraduate degrees in chemistry and economics before spending eight years working in the private sector. During this time jennifer had the opportunity to live and work in different cities which inspired her to complete a masters in Environmental Science and policy at columbia university. After working in the environmental sectors in various roles, jennifer joined the San Francisco Planning Department as an environmental planner. Jennifer performs Environmental Review under the California Environmental quality act and contributes to a broader department initiatives within the air, quality and indiscernible and as part of the team. Jen, you have the floor. Thank you. Good afternoon, president hyland and members of the commission. Jennifer mckellar, Planning Department staff and e. I. R. Coordinator for the 550ofarrell street. And joining me is tanya shaneer, an environmental planner, and the senior preservation planner and alice vanderslave clerk can everyone mute their microphones . Were having feedback. Okay, ill start over. Clerk you can just pick up where you left off. Thanks. Joining me today are my colleagues tanya shaneer, the principal environmental planner and justin grubbing, the senior preservation planner and allison vanderslave, and mya small, architecture and design manager. And members of the project sponsor team are present as well. I will now share my screen with the presentation. Can everyone see hang on clerk yes, jennifer. Here we go. Clerk there we go. Okay. Oops. My apologies, im trying to expand this. There we go. Okay. The item before you now is the review and the comments on the 550 ofarrell street project, the Draft Environmental Impact reporter on draft e. I. R. And pursuant to the air quality act in the local procedures for implements ceqa, chapter 31 of the San Francisco administrative code amended in 2013 requires the Planning Department to schedule a Public Meeting and to obtain any comments that the Historic Preservation commission may have on a draft e. I. R. Prepared for projects that contain the resource that the Environmental Review officer determined is a substantial evidence to be a historical resource. The public review period for the draft e. I. R. Began on may 21, 2020, and it will continue to 5 00 p. M. On july 7, 2020. The Commission Members were sent electronic copies of the draft e. I. R. Which included appendix c to the background reports for this project. That includes the Historic Resources evaluation part one significant evaluation. And the Historic Resources evaluation part two, compatibility and impact analysis. Today were here to provide an opportunity for the commission to hear public testimony, to discuss Historic Resources issues pertaining to this project, and to formulate any comments that you may wish to submit to the Planning Department on the draft e. I. R. The comments will be provided to the Planning Commission prior to the planning Commission Hearing on the draft e. I. R. These comments will be addressed in the response to comments section of the e. I. R. Now i would like to introduce my colleague justin grubbing who will provide you with a brief summary of the findings of the draft e. I. R. With regard to Historic Architectural resourc resources. Good afternoon, president hyland and h. B. C. Commissioners. Justin grubbing, Planning Department staff. The project comprised of a single parcel with one building, a Public Parking garage. And demolish most of the existing building but it would retain its existing facade and construct an approximately 105,000squarefoot, 13storey 130foot tall mixeduse building with 111 dwelling units and 1,300 square feet of retail or amenity space. And 22 of the 111 dwelling units would be affordable and inclusionary units. The draft. I. R. Analyzed the project variance to demolish the existing building and construct a new 106,500squarefoot 13storey 130foot tall unit with 1,30 square feet of retail or residential space. The building at 550 ofarrell street was constructed in 1924 and it was designed in the gothic revival architectural style by a master architect indiscernible and the building is eligible for listing on the california register of Historic Resources as a good example of this style of architecture. And 550 ofarrell is a contributing resource to the National Register of the uptown tenderloin district. Which is with the association for the development of hotel and apartment license in San Francisco during a critical period of change and under criterion c as an existing building types that serve the urban population of office and retail workers. And 550 ofarrell has integrity that its able to communicate its indiscernible and to be a contributor to the Historic District. The parking garage is not in the gothic revival style. The defining feetires include lowscale two store massing and a facade organization separated by piers and decorative elements that are referred to as gothic revival style. Looking like arched windows on the second floor and the balcony with arches at the center bay, among others. Based on this, the 550 ofarrell building and the Historic District are resources for the purposes of ceqa. And the draft e. I. R. Concluded that the proposed project would have a substantial change on the significance of the individual Historic Resource at 550 ofarrell street. It was determined to be a project level with unavoidable impact to demolish most of the 550 ofarrell Street Building and the proposed change to 550 oh, fair i street would not comply with the second of interior standards and it would result in the removal of characterdefining massing and reenforced concrete construction and contributing to a substantial loss of the Historic Building materials and form. Similarly, the draft e. I. R. Concluded that the project variance would result in an adverse change on the single Historic Resources indiscernible this was determined to be a project level change and unavoidable impact due to the fact that the project variance would demolish the 550 ofarrell Street Building and in contrast to the proposed project not retain the primary facade. Two mitigation measures are identified for the significant and unavoidable impact to the individual Historical Resources resulting from the proposed project. The first measure requires the project sponsor to undertake the documentation and video representation of the building. And to require a permanent display of the interpreted materials concerning the history and the architectural features with the relationship with the uptown tenderloin district. While it reduces the impact on the Historic Resources at 550 ofarrell, this remains significant and unavoidable. Through mitigation measures are identified for the significant and the unavoidable impact to the historic architecture resources from the project variance. The first two are identical with those identified with the proposed project. And the third is applicable only to the project variance that needs consultation to determine whether any character defining features of 550 ofarrell could be sel salvaged materials. While these mitigation measures would reduce the impacts, this impact would still remain significant and unavoidable. Also proposed project and the project variant were determined to have a less than Significant Impact on the uptown tenderloin Historic District. To address the significant and unavoidable impact of the proposed project on the individual historic area, they have three alternatives to the project. The no project alternative, a full preservation alternative and a partial preservation alternative. And developed in consultation with the h. B. C. Whose members provided feed back during the april 17, 2019 hearing. They recommended the project sponsor explore putting more height on the full preservation alternative. And increase the setback above the retain facade at one of the partial historical preservations. And the revised analyst indiscernible in additionally with direction from the Planning Department decided to convert one of the partial preservation alternatives into the proposed project and originally proposed project would modify to be the project variance. The no project alternative would keep the existing building and the parking garage and it would not indiscernible the addition. While this reduces impact, it would not meet any project objectives. And the full preservation alternative, the front portion of the building would be retained and rehabilitated as part of the proposed project. A fourstory addition with the first two stores set back from the main facade by 30 feet and the other 57 feet from the primary facade. This would avoid the Significant Impacts to Historic Resources and no mitigation measures would be required. This project would also meet some of the project objectives. The partial indiscernible alternative would construct a new 13story building with a set back from the facade of the existing building. This would have similar impacts to the proposed project and reduce the impacts with the project variance. However, it would not avoid the Significant Impact related to demolition at 550 ofarrell. And the mitigation measures would be similar to the proposed project. This alternative would meet most of the project objectives. And now i will direct you back to my colleague to conclude the presentation. Pardon me. Thank you, justin. Before i conclude i would like to remind everyone that a public hearing on the draft e. I. R. Before the Planning Commission is scheduled for june 25, 2020. In order to be responded to in the final e. I. R. , comments on the draft e. I. R. Must be submitted orally at the planning Commission Hearing or in writing to the e. I. R. Coordinator for the proposed project by 5 00 p. M. On july 7, 2020. In other words, comments heard by Public Commenters today will not be responded to in the e. I. R. Process. After the planning Commission Hearing, the Planning Department will publish a response to comments document, which will contain our responses to all relevant comments on the draft e. I. R. We anticipate the publication of the response to comments document in december 2020 followed by the e. I. R. Certification hearing in early 2021. That ends our presentation. Staff and members of the project sponsor team are available to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. President hyland great, thank you, why dont we open up Public Comment on this, jonas. Your conference is now in questionandanswer mode. To summon each question, press 1, and then 0. Clerk members of the public i again remind you to enter the queue you press 1 and then 0. Caller this is steve from the sponsor team. Could i briefly speak. Clerk well, this is just the draft e. I. R. So through the chair, Commission President hyland do you want to have this response . President hyland sure, if theres something pertinent that he thinks that is necessary. Two minutes be enough . Caller sure, thank you. I just wanted to emphasize what justin had said is that one of the partial preservation alternatives that were reviewed by you in april 2019 became the proposed project. So i wanted to thank the commissioners for their comments on that partial preservation alternative that did become the proposed project. And that proposed project does have a full floor hyphen between the preserved facade and the tower. Again, its a suggestion of the commissioners in december 2019. And so i just wanted to make sure that the commissioner was aware that your previous review of this project and previous comments were very helpful and in shaping the proposed project as analyzed in the e. I. R. And im available as well as the architect and the project sponsor if you have any questions. Thank you very much. Clerk very good, commissioners. Im advised by my Operations Team that are there no callers. So we will close the Public Comment and open it up for commissioner deliberation, if any. President hyland okay. Commissioners, while you are getting questions in line, if any, i wanted to point out that this was one of the first projects, if not the first project, that we brought to the full commission during the scoping phase of the draft e. I. R. Process. We have been looking at ways to improve improve our influence on the project early on. And so i believe that this was one of the first projects. And as you have heard already that we have had a major impact on the development of the project. And have not caused the applicant to have to redesign. So this has been really been good. The other thing is that this project as a de facto demolition, does fall squarely into our retained elements policy that we have helped to prepare and was adopted by the Planning Commission. And so with that if theres any other Public Comments on the e. I. R. But ill let other commissioners speak first. Commissioner pearlman . Commissioner pearlman thank you, i think that i have my mike on this time. I wanted to echo many of the things that commissioner president hyland just said. I thought that the proposed project is actually a very effective way to do two things. One, is to retain the facade, which is the counter defining feature of the gargoyles was not mentioned but those are some of the most awesome gargoyles that we have in town. That those would be retained. And then the massing is such that it meets with the character of the district for housing. Because this is, of course, no longer a garage as it becomes housing and it then has the facade coming the mass of the building coming right out to the street edge which is the character of this uptown district. So i thought that the proposed project actually i had forgotten that it was originally the one of the partial preservation alternatives. But i agree with commissioner hyland that this is a very effective way to get to a very good solution. Because the variant is clearly a nonstarter and the partial presservation alternative, while it retains most of the project objectists does diminish the rear of the property in terms of light and air to the whole back of the project and while it retains the physical form making of the street, that by the setback because of the switch from the garage to a residential building, it then is kind of out of character with the district by having this large mass set back. So i think that the solution is actually a good one and i think that its a successful process for this project as commissioner hyland said. Thank you. President hyland great. Thank you, i dont see any other commissioner projects. I had two. One is on the actual from typos or edits, the actual document. And, unfortunately, the page number is not numbered so its on the figure for s1. The hig hyphen is referred to aa vertical hyphen but i believe that its actually a horizontal hyphen. I dont know if, justin, if you had if you could speak to that. I think that its a horizontal hyphen, is that correct . This is justin grubbing. I believe that weve been referring to those differentiations as vertical hyphens but i can double check the guidelines to see if we used that video ta vocabulary or not. President hyland okay. Well, we can further discuss that later, we are referring it as a vertical hyphen, it seems that its more of a horizontal hyphen. The other thing that i would add is that im in full support of the proposed project. I think that in our recommendations to the Planning Commission that we should be specific as the project a variance is not something that we support. Specifically for the reasons that commissioner pearlman mentioned. Commissioner so . Commissioner so hello, yes, thank you. I think that i unmuted myself now. I love this project and i really appreciate the amount of detailing and rendering to be so illustrated and also including the context of the adjacent fabric of this site. And thank you for the staff and also the project sponsor working so nicely to prepare this report. I have two comments. I am in support with the proposed project version. I like the idea of the horizontal hyphen, but i would like to know if we could actually have further setback to the hyphenation, and considering the massing and the proportion of that hyphenation floor it is started to basically mimic the same pattern of the rest of the 12 levels of residential units and i would like to see if the hyphenation level could create a more setback. It doesnt seem that its 18 feet setback as if it would be in the partial preservation alternative. I would like to see if the project sponsor and the if they could work out the way to further delineate that separation. I think that would make it the language the pattern language would be more impactful for the delineation between the historic facade and the massing above. The second one that id like to ask is that looking at the materiality of the original well, not original but the photograph of what is the existing facade, it seems like they have paint over it over the years, like with the white thick paint. So my question is that for when were preserving and restoring it, are we going to restore back to its original state or are we keeping this white paint over the facade . Its just a technical question about what is the restoration and preservation of the facade of the existing infrastructure. President hyland justin, did you want to speak to that or jennifer. Maybe justin. Yes, justin grubbing. We i dont believe that we have any historic photos or original drawings that would demonstrate whether or not the building was intended to be painted. But i think that is definitely something that we would look into to see what the original condition was. And if there are any underlying layers of paint that would indicate an early facade treatment. President hyland so maybe we can just request a little investigation. Its probably terra cotta that has probably been painted over the years. Commissioner so yeah, i would really appreciate it. The reason that i brought that up is that it looks like from just the design standpoint about the materiality and also the choice of colors and of palette, that the architect on this job it seems like its illustrating a desire to create a harmony between with the historic facade and also the new addition, which is really great. And i like that aesthetic to continue to actually to create a holistic harmony balance of the material materiality for the old and the new. And thats why i bring that up of to know if we are keeping the white paint or is there Something Else that it would be for restoring. President hyland did you want to speak to our question . Yes, i wanted to clarify. So thats part what we can do as the project goes through Design Review. We can address these in the response to comments. And we would address those under clarification in the project descriptions in the r. T. C. And also ensure that those comments get passed on to the Planning Commission and to the current planners when theyre also looking at the design of the project and doing their project review. Commissioner so that would be great. Thank you. President hyland okay. Commissioner so, is that all . Commissioner so yes, im done. President hyland commissioner pearlman, did you want to speak . Commissioner pearlman yeah, i wanted to just comment on that paint issue. My understanding is that it was a powered concrete structure poured concrete structure. So it would have plaster over the concrete. And then it is scored to look like blocks. So it looks like stonework. So it is likely that it was painted, you know, at the earliest incarnation of this building. I think that it would be worth, again, just as a technical comment, to have, you know, paint samples done and see if you could discover, you know, what the first paint coat was and what that might have looked like. So i think is definitely a doable thing. Again, as miss vanderslight said, a technical review at the Design Review stage. I also wanted to just quickly respond to the setback of that hyphen, whether its vertical or horizontal. I would caution about setting it too far back because then it will make the top look top heavy. And i think that might be you know, so i think that theres some, again, something that would be reviewed at the design stage with staff, but the further back that you go the more top heavy the tower above will look. So, you know, i agree that there should be a very, you know, there should be a distinction thats clear when you see it from the street that there is this setback, but i think that it has to be balanced with the massing above. Again, those are design comments. Otherwise i agree with everybody on the proposed project is the way to go. Thanks. President hyland did you want to respond . Justin . Sorry, i just i wanted to provide the commissioners with the definition that were in the retained element guidelines. We did design a vertical hyphen as being vertical surface or space theyre is placed between two parts of the building to separate or otherwise to clarify a distinction between the two. The element is also used to denote an existing structure and a new development. So vertical hyphen may be short or a full form or its often combined with a Material Change and a small setback to increase its legibility as a change in the building vol all. And the horizontal hyphen is a horizontal spacer placed between two parts of the building to separate or otherwise to clarify a distinction between the two. So i think that what were seeing in terms of it being a vertical hyphen and that there is vertical space between the Historic Building and the new construction. So just to clarify how we came up with that definition. President hyland thats a lot of words. Okay, thank you. Commissioner black, if you want to speak. Commissioner black yeah, i really appreciate the opportunity to comment early on in this scoping session. I think that was excuse me i was happy to have it happen. I agree this is a good project and i agree with the proposal to approve the project, but not the variance. And its interesting, im a little torn on the hyphen, and this this plan it shows a pretty substantial its shaded so that it shows it it shows the setback that i dont think that really exists. Gray if it sets back too far that it will look the building could look top heavy. I think that its the sort of thing that can get resolved when fullscale plans get developed and well get a better sense of where that might go. And i can see both points here and i think that it will be something that can be worried later under the design phase. Otherwise, i think that the e. I. R. Is adequate. President hyland so we should include as suggested in the notes to the Planning Commission, because i believe that this would be the last time that we see this project. So commissioner johns . You may need to unmute. Commissioner johns speaking of things to include in the notes, i think that it would be very useful to make sure that the Planning Commission realizes that this came before us once and that something that we suggested as an alternative eventually became the project. I dont know just how to do that but i do think that the Planning Commission should be aware of a change in o our procedure for te better. President hyland thats a great idea. So lets make sure that is in the memo as well. When does this go before the Planning Commission . Is it very soon . June 25th. Jennifer mckellar speaking. President hyland okay. So its next week. Okay. Good. President hyland great. Maybe ill put it on my calendar to see if i can pipe in. Okay. So i think were good. Staff, do you have enough information to craft the memo to the Planning Commission . Commissioner black . You want to speak again . Commissioner black no, no, sorry. President hyland okay. I dont think that theres a motion. Its just a review, right . Clerk yes, correct. Its a review and comment. I believe that we have enough information and i want to reiterate that whether or not the h. B. C. Funds the draft e. I. R. To be adequate. President hyland i think so. I think the process is markedly improved over previous drafting processes. I agree. I agree as well. I really love this whole document. I love it. Thank you. Thank you. President hyland okay. So i believe that is our last item, jonas. So well adjourn. Clerk i will note and remind commissioners that the Mayors Office has authorized all commissions to reconvene remotely, so we will continue with the need to request formally from the Mayors Office to recon korea reconvene every o our next meeting is the 31st. Thanks, everybody. Bye, thank you. Hi. Im chris manners, and youre watching coping with covid19. Today, im going to be talking about checking with your neighbors. Start off by giving your neighbor a call to see how they are or if they need help. If they dont answer, dont get anxious. Try again later. Check to see if their car is parked nearby. Are they lights being turned on and off during normal hours . If you still cant contact them, contact your other neighbors and see if theyve had contact with them recently. You can also leave a note in their mailbox, and when you do get in touch with them, ask if theyd like to share their Emergency Contact information. If youre getting groceries for a neighbor, get a mask and sanitizing wipe. Put the groceries by the front door and then move back and call them from the sidewalk. If you need to ring the doorbell, dont use your hand. Use the wipe or paper towel that you brought. When you call, stay on the sidewalk at least 6 feet away from them. As youre talking to them, ask about any other help they might need. Some might need further assistance with groceries or just need to chat. Maybe they might need you to pick up prescriptions from the pharmacy. And as always, as soon as you get home, wash your hands. Heres a quick recap. Well, thats it for this episode. I hope you found it useful. Go to sfgov for. My name is Angela Wilson and im an owner of the market i worked at a butcher for about 10 years and became a butcher you i was a restaurant cook started in sxos and went to uc; isnt that so and opened a cafe we have produce from small farms without small butcher shops hard for small farms to survive we have a been a butcher shop since 1901 in the heights floor and the case are about from 1955 and it is only been a butcher shot not a lot of businesses if San Francisco that have only been one thing. Im all for vegetarians if you eat meat eat meat for quality and if we care of were in a losing battle we need to support butcher shops eat less we sell the chickens with the head and feet open somebody has to make money when you pay 25 for a chicken i guarantee if you go to save way half of the chicken goes in the enlarge but we started Affordable Housing depends on it occurred to us this is a male field people said good job even for a girl the interesting thing it is a womens field in most of world just here in United States it is that pay a mans job im an encountered woman and raise a son and teach i am who respect woman i consider all womens who work here to be impoverished and strong in San Francisco labor is high our cost of good ideas we seal the best good ideas the profit margin that low but everything that is a laboring and thats a challenge in the town so many people chasing money and not i can guarantee everybody this is their passion. Im the ive been cooking mile whole life this is a really, really strong presence of women heading up kitchens in the bay area it is really why i moved out here i think that we are really strong in the destroy and really off the pages kind of thing i feel like women befrp helps us to get back up im definitely the only female here i fell in love i love setting up and love knowing were any food comes from i do the lamb and thats how i got here today Something Special to have a female here a male dominated field so i think that it is very special to have women and especially like it is going at it you know im a tiny girl but makes me feel good for sure. The sad thing the building is sold im renegotiating my lease the neighborhood wants us to be here with that said, this is a very difficult business it is a constant struggle to maintain freshness and deal with what we have to everyday it is a very high labor of business but something im proud of if you want to get a job at Affordable Housing done nasal you need a good attitude and the jobs on the bottom you take care of all the produce and the fish and computer Ferry Terminal and work your way up employing people with a passion for this and empowering them to learn please standby. June 19, 2020, lafco. Good morning, everyone. This meeting will come to order. This is the june 19, 2020 regular meeting of the San Francisco local Agency Formation commission. I am sandra lee fewer, c