Transcripts For SFGTV Historic Preservation Commission 72016 20160724

Steve [inaudible] good afternoon commission members. Thank you for letting me speak. My name is steve [inaudible] and resident at 106 south park. 106 south park is a very Historical Building for the Filipino Community here in San Francisco. 106 south park was bought in 1920 by a group of masons who had come from the philippines and we owned that property well over 96 years now. The historical significance of this property is one the First Properties bought my any filipino here in the continental United States. It was a place of refuge. At that time discrimination was high against asians and filipinos at that time and needed a place to stay so they bought 106 south park for 6,000. 106 south park is a Apartment Building located in themunity of south park near bryant and townsends. Many men have stayed there in 96 years. When the men first came they worked at seaman and merchants marines and in the fields and traveled up and down the west coast in californias Agricultural Industry so when they came to San Francisco this was a place to stay and members the filipino masonic order and this place is significant. As i said, it is the first building bought by any Filipino American in the United States and want to preserve this as a historical landmark and tribute to elders who came here in the early 1900s and settled in San Francisco and we are productive so im asking the commission to consider this as a historical landmark. 106 south park and here to answer any questions if you have any at this time. Thank you. Thank you so much. Bernadett e [inaudible] good afternoon. Im the executive drether of philippineee foundation and Cultural Heritage district. Im here to speak regarding the property that the south park area that are owned by the grand lodge. There are differentantties within the grand oriente and there are twentytwo parcel squz want to address a application submitted this month by the Property Owner to divide had parcel of the temple and housing. So, the grand orante lodged owned 3 properties in that area and already sold one and they are attempting to sell the 106 south park hotel where steve lived so we are very concerned. As part of soma filipino heritage district we developed a Historic Context statement to support the district and included in that context statement are the properties and rich and important history as steve has spoke about before me. Just about the farm workers and pulling their monies because there were laws not filipinos were aliens at the time as we were identified to be. That is a property and right next to it, the big housing on the left side is the property that they want to divide. It is together and if they divide the parcel it will make it a lot easier to sell the housing at a high cost. The other hotel has great historical and architectural significance. There are many amazing inside because of the masons and their history. There a lot of history that is really important to our [inaudible] and struggles that they came and contributions of that community and its rel vens to us today. If you can direct staff to do more research on this. We would like to do historic designation. It doesnt appear the Property Owners are going to want to do this because it does significantly effect the Property Ownership as well. Thank you. Any other member wish to speak on a non ajndized item . If so come forward. Seeing and hearing none we will close general Public Comment. Commissioners that places on department matters. Item one, director announcement tim fry Department Staff the directors report is included in your packets. Happy to answer questions at this time. Actually, im not [inaudible] the director is luckily [inaudible] item 2, streamlining Affordable Housing proposal. Good afternoon commissioners. John ram for the record. I will not be making most of the presentation but we wanted to brief you on the governors proposed legislation that could potentially have a impact how we do reviews on Development Project and 2459 is streamlining the governor put forward which will make most Residential Projects as of right as defined in the legislation. As you will haerb hear from anima ree there are a lot of unknlones there is broad language open to interpretation so we are give you our best guesstimate how it will effect the work. The guchbners proposal will require us to approve project without extensive review as of right essentially non discretionary form for any president ial projectst that meet criteria that have a certain level of affordability and are purely residential defined in the state code as projects entirely residential than no more than one level for other use like first floor retail. Such projects more than two units would be as of right as the bill is defined, meaning we cant do extensive review so ceqa would not apply. That fact brings into cession how we review projects that have potential impact on what would normally be considered Historic Resources under ceqa. We are tracking this very very closely because it has a substantial effect how we do our work on president ial projects as well as the procedures for how it would play out for Design Reviews and ceqa and many other issues. Just to be clear, anima ree andicate will reaffirm this, it doesnt mean it doesnt plevept local jurisdictions from doing anything to roir procedures and processing in our planning code so all the prestigeers in the planning code apply, it is just when something is defined as non discretionary and this is the case todayif a project isnt discretionary ceqa does not apply and ceqa is the tool we use to get at a number of issues like Historic Resources or transportation impacts our other impacts. Those procedures and reviews would under this legislation not apply. With that, ill ask ann marie to give more detail and kate will go over projects that would or would not come under this legislation. Ill be arounds for questions as well. Thanks. Thank you. Good afternoon commissioners. Ann marine rogers planning Department Staff and the director said this can be a fundamental shift the way we review Housing Projects in San Francisco. I know as commissioners here and as citizens in the city, there is not a day that we dont think about the housing crisis now and if is this need for addressing the crisisthality drove the governor to put this proposal forward. Today we will kboe over a informational discussion of the bill and my presentation will follow the outline in the packet before you. As the director said, a word of caution, there is much we dont know at this point so weprint what is our best understanding given the vague and rapidly changing language that is in the current draft of the bill. There have been 3 versions of this bill to date and we accept there will be more changes before a bill a eis enacted. What does this bill do . In general a Housing Project that consists of two units or more and consist dwnt the general plan, flaning code or zoning map that time they apply and within certain areas shall be approved if levels of affordsability are provided. Lets talk about where this applies. Controls in the bill talk about designated housing sites and these are sites that allow housing under the general plan, Zoning Ordinance or eir that mitigates potential harm from that housing. Further, the sites must be ajaistant to develop to urban uses which is our entire city or bounded by a body of water which we are on all sides accept for the south. The sites cannot be located on prime farm land, wet lands, high fire hazard zone, Hazardous Waste sites or fault zone or flood plain or flood way rchlt to be clear nearly every site in the city that allows housing is eligible for the streamlining. It is only available to projects that provide a certain level of afford bltd and the level of affordability is how close it is to transit. The project must have at least 10 percent loincome hoar 5 percent very low income housing. In San Francisco those transit Priority Areas are again nearly the entire city. There are a fewair areas outside the transit Priority Areas and these require a higher level of affordsability. The intent is incent vise production of housing where there is support. In the areas that are not immediately adjacent, some areas on twin peaks and outer potola, if they need to provide at least 20 percent of housing at 80 percent or less ami. Keep in mine even though the thresholders are lower than the inclusionary standards this allowed for the stream lining. Projects still need to meet those requirements because it is our law. Also, if there would be replacement required of existing housing, so if a existing site has rent control or income restricted unit on site, these units must be replaced at equal or greater levels of affordability. Displaced tenant need to be paid relocation under state law. Lastly, our review process would change substantially. The city would have 30 days to determine and document if the project complies with our objective standards. It is not consistent with objective stanards and fail to document this within 30 days, the project is deemed consistent with San Francisco law. That 30 day review for consistency is the first step. The city can conduct Design Review but 90 days after submittal of the application. Our Design Review cannot inhibit, chill or preclude minterial approval. So, thats what the bill says and im going to cover what the bill does not say which is how we believe it will interact withsuch planning as we know it today. I will review the faqs in the packet. So, as the director said, does ceqa apply to the streamline projeblths . There should be no ceqa review for projects that qualify. Important processes embedded in ceqa we can work to codify those and make them into objective standards and that includes Historic Resources. What does st. Mean to limit Design Review to that which kuz not inhibit or kill or preclude minterial approval . That is a good question and unclear at this point. It appears projeblths cannot be denied but department can request changes during that winnow for Design Review. I already answered the other one, does San Franciscos higher inclusionary requirements apply. Yes, they do. Will the onsight bmr units be able to be rental units . First let me say, they have to provide that affordable units on site in order to be eligible for streamline. Can they make the rental units is the next question and currently, no. If there is no discretionary action we cant dhoo cost of [inaudible] agreement in San Francisco to enable the onsight bmr units. Projects that went to provide bmr rental unit may be able to do so with subdivision or discretionary process. It is important to know as the State Government is considered this trailing bill they are also considering other bills qu one of which is talked about is being bundled into this decision, called the palmer fix and that would undue the need for had cost of hawkens agreement and do bmr unit in conjunction with the non discretionary projects in this bill, the bill requires affordable to be on site . That is correct. Doesnt require rental versus for sale . That is right. Thank you. This is probably the question that is more purltinant which is how does the city protect the Historic Resources. As you know Historic Resource protections that currently occur in the ceqa process would not occur under this draft bill. In fact, the new version says streamlining cannot be used on sites that are National Historic or state listed resources, however t is unclear how our local resources locally landmarked buildings in article 10 and article 11, how those protections would apply. Article 10 and 11 have objective triggers, that stimulate your review and our departments review, most of our review is within the field of discretionary actions and discretionary application. So, in order to keep those protections we would have to look at recodifying things into more objective language to move it out of the discretionary realm, which would be eliminated. What happens to projects that need a variance and exception or conditional use authorization . This is something changing and may change again. Currently as we understand it, it appears project needed exception are no longer eligible for streamlining. If this understanding is correct, the project needing a variance or downtown exception, may not be eligible for streamlining. However, projects requiring conditional use authorization would be eligible for the streamline we view if the project met all our objective criteria. It appears the city could not apply this objective critireia deciding whether to approve the ceu. While the conditional use process would be allowed it needs to be concluded within the timeframe of state law and may mean the prauzs would need to hapgen be complete td within the 30 day review window for objective standards, not 90 day for Design Review. There is lot about exempting city with housing production. [inaudible] why all cities need to comply with the bill. We anticipate this will be not been the final version, it is a trailing bill so the procedures in sacramento require this be concluded by the end of august so we are watching the state legislature and the state hcd department for further updates and kate will run through a few specific examples so you can see how it will play out. Good afternoon members of the commission. Kate coner, planning Department Staff. The department with city tourns office is beginning if to work through the state bill to streamline Affordable Housing proposals and made conclusions. I like to reiterate this is a evauvling process and the city is working with the state to clarify portions of the bill to determine what San Francisco repercussions will be. My presentation is reliminary discussion of the types of project eligible for the streamlining under the bill and please synchronize understand this is base ond the fird third version of the bill. Projects that are eligible for the streamlining are projects that are housing projict providing Affordable Housing on site. Any project seeking exception isnt part. This could be exception for rear yard or occupyen space which are common in the process. Code complying processes may utilize the streamlining stipulated in the bill. The majority the projects that are reviewed by the Planning Commission and using the entitlement processes are tip ypically using the exceptions stipulated. Non Housing Projects like office or hotel or commercial projects are not eligible for the streamline. One example might be a as of right apartment project and you can maybe at the Planning Commission as a discretionary review. That project may be eligible for streamlining but if it needed a variance or exception it would not. Under the current understanding of the bill and as ann marie mention conditional use authorization may be eligible for the streamlining providing the objective findings are made. So, a very common conditional use authorization is a building over 50 feet in height. The process is still on the table, be can utilize it but have to meet the guidelines for process time. We may only apply the ubjeblthive standard. Findings regarding desire nlt, necessity and compatibility isnt something we can make. We are working how the applications will be processed. This chart and hopefully you can see it on your screens, goes through a variety of different potential projects. So, the first one is a 13 unit in the eastern neighborhood area plan. They will provide inclusionary housing on site. The current entitle. Process neighborhood notification and discretionary review and ceqa process is community planned exemption. Under the bill it may be eligible for streamlining and the rational is because there are no exception squz the Affordable Housing is provided on site. If you take a similar project, 35 units in the eastern neighborhood plan, say they are paying the fee. Again, the entitlement process is neighborhood notification without potential for dr but they would not be eligible for streamlining because they elect to pay the fee and not provide the units on site. For some of the larger projects, 100 or 150 units in the eastern neighborhood are providing the affordable units on site and have to go through a large project authorization and say they have exceptions for rear yard or permitted ubinstructions and parking, they may go through a eir and not eligible for the streamlining and that is because they are asking for exceptions. Lets look at smaller projects. 15 unit in rc 4, if they provide the units on site and commonly have to go through conditional use authorization over 50 feet in height they may receive a [inaudible] they would not be eligible if they are asking for any sort of variance like rear yard or open space. Lets take that same project and say they dont need any exception squz only get the conditional use for height and may be eligible but stuck with the objective findings as part the conditional use process so cant make findings regarding [inaudible] if they get the conditional use for building over 5 ofeet in height but in the upper tenderloin district it would not be eligible. There is a lot of different factors under how we are currently processing our projects, it seems a lot before the Planning Commission may not be eligible, but this could also be a factor how developers change and plan a project. There is a number of potential considerations that may influence development. First, developers may have to rethink the necessity of a exception like how much is that exception worth and does it warrant a longer process. Second, if we believe this bill may utilized on smaller scale projects would developers be more likely to provide the affordable unit on site to get the faster process. In closing, this is a evolving process and likely the first of many conversations but this concludes my presentation and available for any questions. Just to clarify, the way the bill is written now, if you do Housing Development with the rental housing on site affordable you are require today get a cost of hawkens to get a cost of hawkens there has to be exceptions . Correct. This would not apply to any rental projects because it requires on site and you need a exception for on site. Exactly. Thank you. Any other questions . I like to ask abouti read the legislation and the section within a site designated in the National Register Historic Places the section that appears unclear as to whether local Government Policies and landmarks would be included in that. It appears the intent is to include those but it does want say anything about local government so i would wndering if you asked the question to the mr. Palmer who is with the state of california for many many years or others up there in the Governors Office as to what the intent is behind that or ask shipo, if you asked the question of the local government and should say that is what we want. Commissioners i have posed the question to the office of Historic Preservationism my last correspondsance was a few weeks ago and said they would reach out to the Governors Office and provide a response. I havent received that response just yet, but we did express an interest in creating some sort of exemption for locally designated resources. Adding local into the bill. It seems like that was the initant. Thank you. Commissioner hyland. What if property on the current site needed to be demolished . It is new project defined as of right does that mean ceqa doesnt apply and they can demolish it quite easily . Yes, that is correct. You would be able to go through had demolition and it would be a minterial permit. If it Housing Units . It is a requirement within the bill as far as being able to pay for relocation cost and if those units are income restricted being able to replace those but it isnt super clear how that will be done. Any other questions . One thing to follow up is there are objective criteria within planning code section 317 so those still apply in our review process. Thank you. We should do Public Comment. Any member wish to speak on this item . Seeing and hearing none well close Public Comment. Thank you very much for your presentation and keep us posted as the legislation advances. That places on item 3, review of past events at the Planning Commission, staff report. Good afternoon, tim try Department Staff. Several item tooz share since our last hearing in june. First i wanted to welcome members from our Summer Internship Program in the audience today. The inturn program is a 12 week program that started june 6 and ends august 26. There are 31 interns tote lt this year which is sth largest number we had in any given year. They are all paid internships. The high school inturns do not work full time, but all other inturns do. There were over 500 applicants this summer, so it was quite a feat to go through all the applications but these are the stars of that group and working on a variety of projects that directly effect or contribute to this commissions work. In particular i just wanted to point out, we have a couple Historic Context statements under way, one for Diamond Heights and other for excelsior neighborhood. There is landsmark designation for sunset area as part the sunset survey the commission adopted. We are also conducted a inventory of murals within the Mission Neighborhoods to provide more oversight and protection for those murals and in concert with the communities watchful eye over the significant muralsment we have a intern evaluating ceqa impacts to Historic Districts which is challenging to get our heads around and cumulative impact that result from demolitions or alterations within a Historic District. Finally, we have a inturn working on some amendments to your landmark designation work plan, in particular we asked the intern to look at the previously adopted context statements and surveys related to sites of civil rights and social and Cultural Heritage and compile the property jz sites and will bring those to you in august for consideration as part of your work program and in support of your priorities under your own work program. Like i said, the inturn hp is 12 week program, each intern is assigned a planner our mentor that supervises their work and have weekly discussions and site visit and presentation that highlight the work we do. The final week of the program the inturns will present their final work products and you will likely see many of the work projects shortly. I want to take the time to tell the interns how much we appreciate their work. They are doing all a fantastic job and we look forward to workingcontinue work wg them this summer but hopefully in the future. Thank you. Thank you and welcome. Welcome to our commission hearing. Commissioner that places you sorry. I center a lot to say. I also wanted to happily welcome des rea smith to the Planning Department. Des rea is a in the audience today and as you move des array from her former life with San Francisco heritage destricate drether she worked on preservation projects and here on a monthly basis speaking on advocacy initiatives and programs offered by heritage and range from historrecollect cob text statement, land mark. Summer Youth Programs and legislation. She is cochair of latinos and Heritage Conservation dedicated to promoting Historic Preservation in latino communities. She received bachelors in sociology in womens studies from universey of georgia and masters in planning from university of arizona. You will likely see here. She is backfilling susan parks former position. Susan was promoted after Jonathan Lamer left and works on the survey team in designation to more things. At the july 7th manning commission hearing, the Planning Commission approved a project at 651 geary street infill construction in the tendser loan. Memberoffs the district were not completely happy with the design and felt there were improvements that could be made. One of the conditions of approval the arc provide design guide ons the final projject continue working with staff. The commission had that as a condition of approval and will schedule that arc hearing probably in august for you to consider. So, that is as a policy decision the commission is adding arc like as they have projectsi think it is a great idea. I dont expect it will happen often but this is where they felt the arc could provide meaningful guidance on the design. It is a issue that we face all the time when we have a National District that isnt a local district so we dont have any jurisdiction over that, so it is nice to see that linkage so we do at least see projects and perhaps can help influence the design. Absolutely. And then finally, the commission asked for report on 60 rustle street. This was in response to Public Comment where a member of the public cited the 60 rustle street is residents of dr. Edmind dixon joan rr and asked whether that information could be incorporated in the Historic Resource evaluation. The item has been continued at the Planning Commission so had Planning Commission hasnt scheduled a vote on the project, but we did provide you a cover memo and our email backgrounds working with Historic Preservation consultant updating the information and what was found was that it appears dr. Jones parents lived at 60 rustle street and he lived at 42 rustle. Doing more research and looking at the criteria for significant persons it is more likely that ucsf or dr. Jones residents or the va hospital where he practiced may be better associated with him if he is a significant person we didnt take it to that next level, but in short, the determination is 60 rustle on its own doesnt have a Close Association with him because only his parents lived there and he did not reside on that property. That information is included in your packets and happy to give you a update on the commissions final vote once they take up that item on the regularly scheduled hearing. So, with that, i have no other comments. Thank you. Commissioner pearlman. Thank you. Um, tim, i wonder if you can comment on the two speakers about 106 south park. Is that something that is submitted. This is a case where the Neighborhood Group has come forward so dont know if you had interaction with them specifically . We have been working with the Community Members that spoke on behalf of the designation as part of the filipino Cultural Heritage district currently in plauss process or the strategy is in process. The properties were identified as part of the central soma area plan survey which you adopted. They are included on our draft working documents as part of the plan to pursue landsmark designation. If this commission felt strungly we should prioritize that or bring it sooner we are happy to do so. I believe we have 2346 information to provide you for a hearing at a fairly short timeframe, but i guess the short answer is it is on our radar and work wg them but it is at the commissions discretion how you like us to proceed. Otherwise those recommendation for designations will come with the area plan package which likely wont be until toward the ends of this year, beginning of next is this something that came up . The second speaker eluded to a sale and concerns about that which seems to spark a urgency. Absolutely. That is where it is likely coming from . Certainly, if the commission wanted to schedule a hearing at a future date quee prepare materials for you in that timeframe. Commissioner that places you on commission matters. Prez dents report and announcements. I have no report or announcements consideration of adoption of draft minutes for april 6, 20 ask draft minutes for june 16, twnt 16. I have a correction to be draft minutes for the arc hearing of april 6. For each of the items on page 2 and on page 3 it has the aye as all members but only 3 of us were there. Only 3 members were there. Any other corrections . A spur. This was before june 15, our meeting. On which page . I saw supr. It is on the second page under review of past events orphthe Planning Commission at the bottom of the page and it was my comment about the governors bill which we just discussed. I received emails from spur. Thank you. Any other comments . At this time we will take Public Comment on draft Meeting Minutes of. Any member wish to speak about the minutes . Seeing and hearing none we close Public Comment. Motion to adopt the minutes move to adopt the minutes. Second. As corrected. Sthra sknlogez second to adopt had minutes only that motion. Commissioner hasz, yes. The motion passes 7 to 0. Places on item 6. A couple weeks ago with assistance of mr. Fry and gave a presentation to i think it was 62 people at the presidio golf club. I used a outline that was used to introduce intern tooz the commission. The reason i point this out is, to get 62 people on a wednesday night to hear somebody talk about Historic Preservation was i thought not only astonishing but quite gratifying. The questions were really really good and showed a level of interest which i had not appreciated without their there in the community. There may be other opportunities for people to do this or maybe this sort of thing could provide us with app opportunity to talk to a group of people who would not normally come to one of our neighborhood meetings or open houses. I just mention that. Thank you. Other commissioners, any comments or questions . I have a few disclosers. I was contacted by email on two projects, 16 5 o farrell the one with the windows replaced. Right. And the 151 liberty which is another project we had heard and then i had met with the project consultants for the Asian Art Museum we are hearing in the arc after this. Okay. Think we can move on. That places on the consent calendar. Item 7, the art living innovation. Request for certificate of appropriateness. You have no speaker cards. Any member wish to remove this from the consent calendar . Seeing and hearing none we close Public Comment. Any commissioners wish to remove from consent . Do i is a motion to approve the consent calendar . So moved. There is a motion and second to approve item 7. As proposed. Commissioner hasz, yes, johnck, yes. Matsuda, yes. Pearlman, yes, hyland, yes. That passes unanimously 70 and places on the regular calendar. We will take items 8 ai together. All items recommending Small Business Commission Approval of legacy business application. A 82016008460 at 401 haight. 401 cluminute street. 12 williams place. Item 8 d, Record Number 2016 nob nab 2981 24th street. Record number 2016008440 lbr, 700 geary. 1354 harrison street. 8 g, 228 bay shore boulevard. 601 van ness avenue. 1544 grand avenue. Commissioners before we begin i want to take the opportunity to introduce her to you while she has been with the Department Just over a year this is the first time presenting before the commission. Stephanie works on the Preservation Team mainly on ceqa related work but expanding duties as there is lots to do in our office. Stephanie graduated with bachelor of arts in from cal state and has a masters in Heritage Conservation from usc and worked at city of West Hollywood as assistant planner so welcome to the hpc. See will walk you through legacy business. Welcome. Thank you. Good afternoon t. Stephanie [inaudible] planning Department Staff. The items before you today are for 9 legacy business nominations submitted to the Planning Department june 20, twnt 16 and ready for recommendation. The department received the Business Applications by june twnt filing day. All applications were reviewed by the office of Small Businesses for completion prior to transmittal to the planning deparchlt. Out of the 3 criteria businesses need to meet to be considered eligible for the listing on the legacy business registry, the hpc is tasked providing recommendation as to whether each business meets criteria 2, which states the business has contributed to the neighborhoods history and or identity of a neighborhoods or community. The packets can contain years of services to the community and physical features with success of the business. The first application before you is two jacks nicks place at 401 haight street. [inaudible] the next application is for toy boat desert cafe located at 401 clument established in 1982 and contains pop cultural memer belia throughout. The next application is adler museum caf e at 12 williams place. This is combined bar and museum established in 1968. It was a union bar and also one of San Franciscos oddest museums housing a wide collection of [inaudible] the next application [inaudible] located at 2981 24th street. This is 501 c 3 organizations established in 1977 and trains artist in the mural process, offers mural classes and worked with community to promote mural arts. The next application is [inaudible] located at 7000 geary which is neighborhood sea Food Restaurant established in 1974 that offers high quality generously portioned sea for for 42 years. The next application is for loan star saloon at 1354 harrison. This is a local bar established in 1989 as a space where working clas gay men can gather and be celebrated. There next application is gilmans kitchens and bath at 228 bay shore established in 1974 and offers kitchen and bath remallling. The next application is Community Board located at 601 van ness. This 501 c 3 organizations established in 1976 and provides public conflict resolution service. The last application is for [inaudible] Creative Design and metal works at 1744 grant avenue. The business was established in 1948 and the oldest ongoing metal arts design house and production studio. After your packets were published i received a letter of support for this specific application which i have a copy here for you to review. Physical features for each business can be found in the case report. Staff foinds each business has met the criteria to qualify for listing in the legacy business registry. This concludes my presentation, happy to answer question squz have a few representatives from some the businesses who would like to speak on behalf of the applications. At this time well have the members of the businesses come forward. Well give 3 minutes to each speaker. Im one of the members owners of specks 12 museum caf awhich my father opened in 1968felt we are a union bar and sener of access culture and center of world travelers. We are a union bar and so our profit margin isnt that great. The 10 year lease that will provide is extremely important. My daughter is here and only 23 and also a owner. When my father passes we will carry on the tradition. The building started in the 50s and 1955 it was a [inaudible] it was destroyed in the earthquake and rebuilt as a 4 Story Building and speakeasy during the prohibition and alaska Fishermans Club in the 30s and during the war in 1945 it was a bohemian bar and gay womens bar from 1948 to 54 and 55 to 63 which i remember was a middle eastern music and dance place. It was an atillion neighborhood bar. We got the building in 67 and spent a year in court to get the license because [inaudible] become a topless bar so it took a year. We are committed to the history and legacy of the institution and if you look at the walls, my father loves San Francisco history. Maritime history. We have legacy of sea men and shoreman. The international travellers. We are excited to be part of the beginning the legacy business we hope goes arounds the country and thank you for your time. If you have any questions. Thank you. Did you have a question . We can take the next speaker. Good afternoon commissioners. Richard [inaudible] new Legacy Business Program manager with office of Small Business. Thank you. Welcome. The owner of 2 jacks nicks place nicky cooper couldnt be here so asked me to read a statement on her behalf. 2 jacks nicks place like to thank board of supervisors and Historic Preservation commission dedicated to the business program. It is honor and privilege to be included thip first group of applicant and receive support from the board of supervisors. The lower haight munchants and Neighborhood Association and countless people from across the city and state. 2 jacks has been and tocontinues a staple in the lower haight and look forward contributed great food, positive energy, inspirational art and love to our neighborhood and city. Thank you. Thank you. Good afternoon commissioners. Justin [inaudible] i am on the sun of the owner of gilmans kitchens and bath and hear to talk about our story. Thank you for taking the time to address all the local businesses and hear our testimony. Gilmans kitchens and bath evolved over more than 60 years of business. We originated as a hardware store. Dick gilman transferred to window and screen business. Mr. Gilman maintained business until 1983 when larry [inaudible] became sole proproiter. Larry had a career in sales. After two years of Screen Service larry acquired abinatery to offer in the warehouse space. As a months and years passed sale squz growth persisted, new mbs joined the gilman family. Gilman screens and kitchens. Brought larry and gilmans into the remodeling world that allow for products and Services Including counter tops, hardware plumbing fixtures and flooring. This is a resulted in a staff of highly trained professionals. The new products and new jobs and thriving xhounty resulted in show rooms around the bay area. We have begin residential contractors and offer Design Build Service with a substantial amount of work continueic in San Francisco. We are a company evolved to continue to meet the need of local residential. Our technology, service and employment have attracted san franciscans. People have lunched they can trust the company and find Something Special molded from Years Service the community. We serve as the only store front in San Francisco to offer window and door Screen Services. The service is a time honored tradition. Thank you for considering our application and assisting to maintain a piece of history. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Im the communication director for Community Board and always go with handouts. Community boards is now celebrating the 40 ath anniversary [inaudible] empowering in a certain way. Community board as a institution that does reflect what we call the social Justice Movement of the 1970s being fonded in 1976. Our founder [inaudible] provided Legal Assistance with the International Hotel was having the multiple issues. What i would like to speak to directly and have my associates here will talk about our program, in the 28 years i have been with Community Board i am a pinata of facts. Community board is displaced 4 separate times in the 40 years based on the changes in real estate and rent. We were on 24th street at folsom for 10 years and the rent doubled. We call it the google bus phenomenon. We were at market and van ness 10 years proir, dot com pushed us out. We are looking for the support the business legacy can provide us as a Cultural Institution rather than a tangible fath fact and our current rent we are on a 5 year lease and expires at theened of 2017. One final thing, Community Boards contributions to conflict resolution is so substantive we have a book on ourselves which is the last page of the handout. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. My name is karen lipny, im the interm alternative dispute program manager. The executive director dar lean white apologizes she cannot be here because of prior commitment and as jim said our organization was founded by rea shung [inaudible] in 1976 and continue a operate in that vein today. Our conflict resolution serveices are provided in spanish, cantonese and mandarin. One example of what we do provide to the community is we have a contract with the San Francisco Unified School District to provide conflict Resolution Services to teachers and we work with both the collaboration between labor and management. No one is turned away for Remediation Service for lack of funds. A core commitment of Community Boards is offering of basic intermediate and advanced mediation, conflict and facilitation train toog the public. As a result Community Boards has a active pool of 400 volunteer meadators who have taken our intensive 40 hour basic mediation training and im one of the volunteer meadators. We have a pool of conflict coaches which is a recent addition to Community Boards services and this is Service Provided to individuals who re quest mediation but the other party or parties do not want to come to the table and have a conversation so what we provide sp communication tools and ideas to assist the person in addressing the conflict without actually going the mediation table. Our commitment is to facilitate conversations among individuals, businesses, organizations and neighborhoods whether that involves mediation, conflict coaching our facilitation. One example in the Community Involvement is the map 2020 emission plan which was and is a ongoing conversation deal wg Community Concerns with displacement and Affordable Housing. To inshurn we maintain a Diverse Community of volunteer meadators and insure our services are accessible to the community, we offer scholarships for training, and have a inturn sp program. We have been providing Services Since 1976 and have a record of 85 percent resolution for long term and sustainable agreements for people who use our services. Thank you very much and if there are any questions, im here. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you. Good afternoon commissioners. Ross warren and i speak in support of item 8 e on todays agenda. The pacific cafe. My partners and i are proud we are being considered for the legacy business registry. We are indeed a long standing Community Service restaurant where we have been in business since july 4, 1974. We are still going strong and hope to continue serving the community far into the future as we can and we think being placed on the legacy register will be a big plus for us. Thank you. Thank you. Any additional applicants who would like to speak . We will open for Public Comment but want to make sure the applicant for the Legacy Business Program have spoken. At this time we will open up for Public Comment about item 8 a through i and have one speaker card from anthony veercamp. Thank you good afternoon commissioners. Im anthony [inaudible] with National Trust for Historic Preservation and thank you for the opportunity to speak about this legacy Business Registration applications. My comments are on behalf of the National Trust and on behalf of our San Francisco heritage which find itself [inaudible] im pitching in with mike bouleer. Both the National Trust and San Francisco heritage have partnered in exploring the unique challenges conservice Cultural Heritage resources. Legacy businesses in particular which heritage addressed in the 2014 policy paper sustaining San Franciscos living history. I think recent news about threats to the stud bar has highlighted just how relevant these issues are and how passionately the Community Feels about this as a historic preserve for the concern and concern for future the city. The National Trust supported the creation of the legacy business registry and irk withed on the Campaign Last november with prop j which stabbed the legacy business and Historic Preservation fund. Together we advocate for inclusive approach to supporting the cities Cultural Heritage assets. In contrast to the exclusive and restrictive criteria. Regarding the application under consideration today we are gratifyed the 12 applications from businesses and non profits from throughout the city and reflect equally diverse range of businesses and non profits. It is clear many applicant wouldnt qualify under traditional designation criteria but made significant contributions to the social fabricf. We see this not as a short coming but evident by the legacy business registry is so important. Many applications include modest personal stories that provide insights into dem graphic and social development that wouldnt have been uncovered using usual methodology. We provide physical features to the idea of the businesses or non profit. The case report would benefit that define each applicant and how they contributed to San Franciscos living history since it is this qualities that make a diferance between a bonifyed experience. [inaudible] recognition and public support to help insure perpetuation but we are fully supportive of the applications and look forward to seeing the program grow and flourish. Thank you. Any other member wish to comment on the item . Seeing and hearing none well close Public Comment and bring back to the commission. Commissioner matsudo. I want to thank the business squz non profits who came out and shared information about your businesses and Non Profit Organizations and am very happy. I know commissioner hasz is just as happy to see we are finally seeing the businesses come forward and that there is a staff person who is going to help support these businesses and hopefully well see a lot more applications coming forward. I just wanted to ask logistical questions. I think the information that we received today is great. I think im just wondering what the public will see when the businesses are registered and go forward, what will the public see . It is important for the public to understand these stories and i think i have been to a number of them and know how special they are to their particular community and San Francisco in general, but think it would be great for the public to have access or template or easy to find registry to figure outwe have gone through a lot of work to have them come forward andbroid a lot of information but think that has to trickle to the general public so these places can be sustained. One of the applications, the history of the pacific cafe provided a good overview and information about the wine. Smookind of template so we can see uniformity. When im on line i want to know about the rest aurant im going to so to have a template that is easy to do with staff and the business to really show the true cultural and historical at buttes i think would be great. Thank you. Commissioner johnck. I was interested what anthony you were saying aboutwere you suggesting an additional criteria that has something to do more with the businesses direct contribution or Non Profit Organization to San Francisco history . Can you come to the mic . This is an evolving program too and the staff person is here too. Thank you very much and be interested in his reaction at some point about adding other criteria or how much work is this. Any further thoughts on that. Just a greater articulation to explain how the businesses or practices help to support the culture and traditions of the city. We can look at that Going Forward i guess. I dont have anything specific to add now, butyeah. Commissioner pearlman. Thank you. It is a empresive list because those that have been in the city a long time and know many or some of these businesses that now there is more of a impetus to find the ones we dont know about. I want to support what commissioner matsuda said like you go througha restaurant and on the door is a sticker that says it is triple a or zagt guide. If there could be a legacy business sticker, which doesnt seem like it would be hard for a Graphic Designer to come up with and connect to a website. The registry website that then has that type of information, so there is the connection and then the restaurant or business could have that on their own website with the linkage to that as well so think that is way to link all it together. If you didnt know you walk in and see this wonderful beautiful graphics symbol. These are excellent suggestions. I did want to let you know we are open to refining the criteria. Probably the next few batches we will use existing application and had it translated into 3 different languages in addition to english so probably stick with that for now but open to refining it. Yes, we do have the intent to create sticker tooz go on the windows of business. We have a Marketing Team that is working to create a logo and do a marketing plan for the project. For the program. Thank you very much. Another question. My understanding is the business had to be 30 years old to apply, so this one i think it is worthy, but the 8 f, the loan star saloon was established in 1989 so not reaching the 30 years yet. I thought it was established in 1989 the business itself. I dont know your name, sorry. Are you here from loan star . I believe the ordinance says if a business is in danger of displacement because of loss of lease or the building is sold if they have been in business 20 years or more they may apply for legacy business registry. Thank you, i appreciate that. That answers the question. Im aware the 20 year stipulation was in the legislation, just not sure still if that pertains to this particular business. Seeing the 30 year but didnt recall thethank you. Commissioner johns. I just wanted to emphasize what i thought would be from the historical point of view a nice addition and im familiar with several businesses. I just like to mention one which is the pacific cafe. In the materials that we were submitted, one of the things that i thought was tremendously important was mentioned and thereat is when the pacific cafe started it in a sense had part of its birth was from a corporate debacle then known as Victoria Station which was a Franchise Restaurant Group that took old Railroad Cars and made them into a restaurant and the furnishing from the seats from Victoria Station located under the freeway, 280 about broadway in what was then a darelic area and ended up as the chairs and booths on geary boulevard. I think it is a little veniate which shows something which is extremely important and enduring about San Francisco and that is the ability of the citizens to take what has been a disaster and not worked and reformulated into something that is success and has proceeded lots of people not only with very delicious meals about a very nice livelihood. It is the sort of thing in San Francisco we keep talking about. That is what we like to see more of and here is a example that really embodies a true storey where that happened. In the case of pacific cafe i would have liked to have seen that highlighted and in the case of the other businesses. Really the architectural things of these businesses i dont think are very important most of them and not particularly interesting and we are not really trying to preserve those. What we are trying to preserve is the legacy of this business, the essence of it, what it has done as a cultural resource, so i would really like to see more of a focus on these applications on why this is important. It isnt important because it was founded 30 years ago for gods sakes, there are lots of businesses around for 30 years, but really what is the essence of its contribution that is so interesting and so important. Thank you. Mr. Fry. Commissioners tim fry Department Staff. All your comments i think and including the Public Comment are very helpful and as the Planning Department hires our own legacy business representative to work with richard and office of Small Business, these are the type of comments we look forward to because it will help refine the application and in particular with varied skill sets of the applicant we have time to sit down with them to provide a more robust narrative or expand how they do or do not meet the criteria. As richard said, you may not see it in the most application that come to you over the next several hearings, but well work on refining that. Also, i just wanted to point out now that we are mubing these along you are likely to see between 10 and 15 applications on every agenda through now to the ends of the year. Thank you. Any other comments . Anybody want to make a motion . Move to approve. Move we approve them all. Ill second. There is motion and second to adopt recommendation for approval for items 8 ai. Roll call vote. The motion passes unanimously 70. Places on item 9, Record Number 2013. 11 sakes 8 and 2015001314 prj at pier 70 craen cove park and twenth street historic core project. Good afternoon. Richard [inaudible] Department Staff. I want to provide a introduction to staff from port of San Francisco who will provide a informational update to two projects that are occurring at pier 70 known as Union Iron Works Historic District. These are crane cove park and 20t street historic core project. This will be the first of two presentations that you have on pier 70. The next series of presentations are scheduled for august 3 and will look at the water front site. I like to introduce david [inaudible] from port of San Francisco. Thank you rich, commission, president wolfram. Im joined by mark pis preservation for the port. [inaudible] project manager for orten project within pier 70 and evrodo moray at morton development. I will provide a ovview hopefully you have on your screen being handed out is powerpoint presentation. The port has been in front of you for the pier 70 project between 2006 and 2010 when we developed the master plan and gave a update about the implementation and provided overviews on the his choric core and crane cove park. What is illustrated is the result of the 2010 master plan that shows the 5 gels for pier 70 which is establish a National Register Historic District and adaptively revus the resources the district is nominated and fully a National Registered Historic District. The second goal is retain and expand the ship repair operations. That is what makes pier 70 pier 70. Theport entered into the new lease that will keep them there up to 30 more years. The third goal is create a new system of parks and open spaces within pier 70 and ill give a overview of crane cove park. The 4th is allow Infill Development illustrated inioleo on the slide and this brings back the historic activity and economic tooz deliver public benefit. Environmental clooenup the site from 150 plus years of use. Provide infrastructure for all uses and do the entire project in a sustain able and sensitive way. Since 2010 work wg our partners including orten for a city rich mentioned and port working in crane cove park in bae we provide a site plan and this shows the new revised site plan since the preferred master plan. Today well talk about crane cove park on the north and [inaudible] will speak to o historic core. Crane cove park is 10 acre part where see celebrate history. This is a aerial perspective looking northeast. Approximately 10 acre parcel we are trying to integrate a new park into a industrial historic area. The Consultant Team working with us is lead by [inaudible] ark celltural Resources Group as subconsultant and as i walk through the program ill focus on historic features. Which includes slipway 4 which is cranes 14 and 30 and utility racks and runway. The illinois street fence, building 49, building 30. Later phases building 50, 110, 109 and slipways 13. This site plan illustrates the overall park program and ill start on the north behind the ramp restaurant where we have a reconstructed shore line including a beach area for non motorized human power boats and access to the bay. We have northern uplands which includes Children Play area and building 49 which is a Historic Resource that will be reused for human power boating aquatpic center and small cafe. The south is multipurpose lawn area. One of the impact is building 30 which will be demolished and have slipway 4 which rebuilt for function as a park, aplaza and cranes will be stabilized and maintained. We have crane plaza which is entrance to the slipway off 19th street and that is essentially the part of phase one we will deliver in the next couple months. Everything to the east of slipway 4 is later phase included building 101, 110 and slipway 1, 2 and 3. Next i will wake through a series of slides that you have a handout. The upper slide shows where you are in the site plan and well progress from the north to the south. Here is a exhibit showing what the park will look like entering just south of the ramp restaurant between the ramp and boat works where we open use for ship prepare operations. This is what it will look behind the ramp looking south where we have the noren shore line and beach area. In the distance is building 49 which is reused as park restrooms a cafe and humanp powered boating with crane 14 to the left which will be pushed down at the thochbd slipway to align with 18th street. Just walking north to south. This shows reuse of on sight materials for interpretive purpose and functionally for seating, furnish and Children Play areas. Here is a few looking east just north of building 49 on the crane 14 which is again aligned with 18th street. Here is a view looking west from the end of building 49 to the childrens play area which is tucked away but does want block views. Here is when you arrive at crane 14 looking southwest up toward 19th street with building 49 to the right. North of building 14 with plaza area and rain gardens. On the north side of 49. Here is what it will look at the entrance to the park from 19th street where we are creating a new 19th street to serve as entrance to the park and primary Entrance Point taship repair operations where the new plaza doesnt go into the historic slipway but use features that exist on site for furchishing signage and retaining walls. Here is what it looks like inside the plaza. There is crane 30 in the distance. Here is a view looking down the last remaining slipway where we use kiel blocks for site furnishing. At 19th street entrance plaza to the right you can see how we integrate rain gardens to tell a story and will have a inturpative program that talks about the history of this area of ship building and how it functions and continues to function as ship repair. Just briefly, as i mentioned it is about a 9 acre park but only have enough money it complete first phase which is about 33 million funded from twnt 08 and 2012 parks bond as well as approximately 5 million of fortd capital and Million Dollar grant from mtc. What is green is what we deliver as the first phase. Orange is what we thichck think we can deliver in a later phase and yellow may be bid alternate items and can find the funding to close that gap or bids come in low we can deliver which includes one of the crane. Crane 14 we have to dismantle and store. Just a few of what the park will look like, a aerial view looking southeast. With that i can introduce evrodo to continue the presentation or take questions or comments that you have. Any questions . What is the schedule bay by the way . The park package we are putting to bid 2 phases. The first is to deal with differential settlement going to bid in the next couple days. The second will go out later this year november, december. We have the parkope toon public by january, 2018. We can have our next presenter. Good afternoon. Evrodo [inaudible] representing urban development at pier 70 here to give informational update on our construction activities on site. Giver a idea where we for leasing and general idea where we are with our historic approval process. Construction the buildings are old and range from 1885 to 1945. They faced Environmental Impact weathering impact and people stealing crap metal so the building has seen better days. The first step is secure the site, clean it up and make sure people dont get in there and start the design process to figure how to [inaudible] introduce ret row fit, ada compliance and other improvements for the [inaudible] on the north side of 20th street is where you find mostly Office Buildings immediately to the north side of 20t street and start with building 101 basically the cornerstone of the project. Building 101 is a built in 1917 and about 63 thousand square feet. One the Biggest Challenges with this building is the seismic reto fit in addition to the ornamental damage on the exterior and maintain a sense of what the building was introducing a different use that will honor that space. As you heard through the news we achieved [inaudible] they design and use will be a gallery show room. Looking forward to see that design move forward. They are in design phase and going through the historic review process with the state and National Parks. The overall approach to the building that will be a publicly accessible building Restoration Hardware has their doors open for guests. We are looking forward to seeing that building in due time. In terms of delivery of the building, the timeline is going be driven by the approval process at the historic level. Construction will follow that and hope to get it operational by 2017. Maybe 3 our 4th quarter. Here is a image of water on the third floor seeping through a broken skylight and it is a typical example of the damage these buildings get during the rainy season. Here is a imochblg that ornamental plaster repair work we have to deal with. Try to figure how to repair this and meet the [inaudible] building 102 is about 9,000 square foot powerhouse. This building here is currently occupied by large amount of Electrical Equipment that feed the bae system ship repair yard. The port of San Francisco is working collect ivly with all interested parties to figure a solution to relocate or figure a way to make adjustments to accommodate different use. The proposed use is restaurant and the design intent will be to provide seismic reto fit that respects the main floor. You see 4 large compressors the idea is keep the machinery in place while being functional as alternative use as a restaurant. Building 104 is about 40,000 square foot building 4 stories and we signed a sublease with teae collection they are based out of dog patch a San Francisco based company and their use will be their headquarters and have their Design Studios and a new home i thinkthey are moving from the dogpatch closer to the pier 70 historic area. Some hof it big challenges with this building was pests. There were numerous raccoon families in the building that brought fleas and the tenant walked and got fleas and took them home and sent a care package and apologized. The building was nice enough to continue with our sublease negotiation so happy about that. Overall it is one of the buildings and the seismic solution is it evolvedthere were multiple iterations, concrete share walls and had beams and steel introduce today support the building from falling north through the annex and that is reduced. [inaudible] steel will not be introduced that respects the building in a lot of ways since it is a brick and timber building. We excited bringing the Building Back to use and making sure it is one of the. This is a example that has extensive dry rot that we have to do select repair. There is a wood annex attached to it built in 1945 so the carpenters are trying to figure how to salvage as much wood as possible. A close up of the weathering on the billing. Every day is a New Discovery with these buildings and new challenge and new solution. We are moving along. Building 113 was the in many ways also a crone jewel of the project and a thousand square foot building that has incredble volume. You look in to the east and west and see a beautiful example of cathedral like industrial building. The structural and seismic reto fit respected that existing feeling in the building along withwe have [inaudible] National Park service along with state Historic Preservation office and mark [inaudible] and port staff have been helpful trying to come windup a solution that balances the historic feeper squz reintroducing a ret row fit that will basically save the building in case there is a earthquake. Brick repair is biggest challenge because it was built in 1885 and 86 and dont know the Quality Control standards at the time but it varies so a lot of the work is related to brick repair. As you can see over time the building is falling apart. These are conditions we have been dealing with but again, there is quite a bit of guidance we received from National Park subs, the port and our engineer to get it done and right. This rendering representing the atrium space which is white connector portion of building 114. If you have been to the site, building 114 was built in two phases. It was joined in 1917 by a [inaudible] Steel Building that connected and allowed the crane and the work flow to go to east and west. Steel and glass walls are proposed and approved bay the National Park service as a way to allow for [inaudible] as a balance between tenant use and Public Access and viewing. These glass walls allow people to walk through 20th treat to the atrium to the courtyard and look to east and west and appreciate the ist existing volume. The mezzanine scheme will replicate the mezzanine there now. It will be replicated all 4 sides and allow a large central column area open area cathedral like area to remain in place. The steel is connected and weaved in such a way that a lot of our inspector squz engineers are appreciating how well it is weaved in and matches. We were able to not remove too much existing steel and work with the existing framing there in the building so quite a sight. Building 115, 116 is a continuation of this large 113 structure. As with many of the shipyards a lot of there buildings were related by Railroad Tracks and use. These buildings are connected to building 113 and 14. They are 1930s buildings about 40,000 square feet. Design solution will very much match what is happening in building 113 with exception that the second floor bracing and second floor mezzanine will be set back to the east sidewest side oof the building allowing for immediate appreciation of the volume and space upon entry from the main entry which is from the courtyard. The 3 large opening will serve as the main pedestrian pathways and ada access. Volume will replain mostly in place the ratio is 1 3, 2 3 open space. We also achieved to keep a good amount of the historic cranes in place and will be fixed in place so people can understand these are at one time used to move heavy equipment and hundreds of people worked them. Our last building here is building 14. This building was designed and built in ww 2. No known historic architect or specific data of construction, however it is 66 feet high to the peak, it has beautiful space, about 16, 300 square footpresent footprint and situated in a great place as it represents the southeastern corn thorf premises where we are come up against the 4 city lots. The building itself will receive a very similar ratio of structural mezzanine about 1 3 to 2 3 open and unlike building 113 this building will not require extensive micro [inaudible] since the footing sits on bedrock. It received about 73 [inaudible] and number of footing so large extensive seismic upgrade. The Foundation Work in all buildings is under way. We are under a lot of time contraints and have to meet a lot of delivery dates. We just recently are working to deliver these buildings First Quarter at least building 104, 14 and a few others. We want to be done by First Quarter 2017. Streets and sidewalk improvements will follow that schedule and continue to work with port of San Francisco and community generally to get the building to the right place and to the right use. [inaudible] approval process. Yes, state Historic Preservation Office Issued conditional approval. The National Park service issued full approval on a rolling basis on those. State Historic Office approvals. There are a number of open items left that smaller items non related to structural or larger core and shell improvements. Tenant improvements have been rolling in and getting approved at a good pace with the National Park service and the state Historic Preservation office. That is a big thanks to mark [inaudible] and his team at the port of San Francisco. So, we hopefully would like to move into the part 3 program of the historic tax credit phase hopefully by summer or maybe even sometime closer to next year understanding there will be continuous amendments to the existing approvals as tenant improvements roll out. 113 we dont have a tenant for that building so dont know what the overall interior are going to look like but have given guidance which is reasonable how to address any immediate proposal from a future tenant basically dont want to lead them on to believe they will dothey will achieve this or that, so on the south side Historic Preservation office has gave guidance that their biggest thing is make sure everything is to scale and fits into the industrial look of the south side building understanding the north side frp office use and there is a lot more flexibility for finished look. They have been really helpful, flexible, professional and set to secretary of stanered and responded to their satisfaction. On building 101, page and tremble is the architect along with our restoration preservation architect, mark hullburt from preservation architecture. Mark hullburt is overseeing the process and gives guidance to everything we do in the field and on paper as a submittal to the port of San Francisco and the state Historic Preservation office. Just one question, curious for 102 and 104 with the elevated ground floor plan. What is your accessible entry, ramps on the outside . The ada entry is to the rear. It would have been a difficult challenge to modify the vaulted stair at the 20th street, so the Annex Building will likely not be raised much to allow for ada entry. We are introducing a elevator in building 104 to accommodate access to the rest of the floors. Building 102, the ada design intent is create a ramp on the front the building off to the west side and it will be designed in a way that respects the existing historicfrontage of the building. Definitely challenges we scratched our head about. Great. Commissioners any other questions . Commissioner johnck. I am absolutely amazed and congratulate you and the port for achieving what you have to date on this project. This is really going to be a model for the nation. Been to the buildings many times and the fact you have been able to salvage and save and reuse a lot of the material is amazing. Those compressors are fabulous. They are absolutely fabulous. If you can use those in the restaurant that would be great. I have two questions, one isyou mentioned i this think building 113 you didnt have to use micro piles because this 14. Was it 14 . Yes. Because it was theyou had bedrock that you can use. I thought more about the foundation of all the buildings. Are they all on no, the historic sea shore we got lucky on that building because the historic sea shore curves around and missing it so to speak. Half of 113 to the east required a lot deeper micro piles ranging from 70 to 80 feet to 30 or 40 and range in dynameter from one end to the other and size of footings and rebar and reinforcement required. 113 and 115, 16113 required in the ground beams and it was a show. If you have seen a micro pile go into the dirt t is messy. 115, and 16 will require micro piles but building 14, the engineer were able to go with the larger footing approach and reinforcing a lot of the existing steel bracing and following and mimic the roof top pattern adding [inaudible] rather than removing existing steel. As much as we could we try to leave as much steel in place because these folks building the buildings know how to build buildingsment they riveted well. Some the most intact historic rivets of the time so the engineer are having a field deal geeking out about the design and Structural Integrity of the building. In terms of the soil conditions, it is dependent on the shore line. 113 did get a lot. 14, none. Okay. That is good. Thank you. Any other questions . No. Thank you very much for your presentation and well take Public Comment at this time. Any member wish to comment on this item . Seeing no Public Comment, we will close Public Comment and i thenk that concludes our hearing and following by the arc. We have one more item, item 10. Sorry, i wanted to ask about this item, why it is coming before us and not the Planning Commission . I wasnt sure what particular aspect. Tim fry Department Staff, this has been before the Planning Commission, the Historic Preservation commission asked for a informational presentation. That is to fulfill that request why we are here today. It was when the buildings were threatened. They need today be stabilized and were concerned i talking about the last item about revising article 7 about neighborhood commercial district cus for bars and liquor outlets. It did want seem like something that the hbc it any authority over or im sure if you wereprint present for that hearing but that request was made but are here to share that information. Item 10, Record Number 2014001965 pca article 7, phase 2 of the planning code reorganization and informational presentation. Aaron star, Planning Department nice to be here. It is a unusual presentation to the Historic Preservation commission but this is something im excited about because i think im a nerd or type a personalty. As part the planning code reorganization project, so this is phase two which focuses on article 7. A little background, the project was initiated in 2013 and the purms is make the code easier to read, understand and use. This is by bricks consistency to the code and to the definitions in the code. Phase 1 was adopted by the board of supervisors on february 10, 2015 and signed by the mayor the same year. This is phase 2 focus on article 7 and phase 3 will focus on article 8 and initiated after this phase is complete. What is article 7 . It was created in the mid80s Zoning District and contains the neighborhood commercial district and includes 40 different Zoning District and own set of use definitions. It is first phroneing district in San Francisco to use vertical zone, so first, second and third floor and above. And the First District with zoning code tables. You understand all the Development Requirements when you look at one chart. So, this ordinance is split into two separate ordinances, 700 pages long collect ivly. One ordinance deletes everything in article 7, all the use tables and definitions about 340 something pages and the other one does all the new charts so just adding them back and makes other changes to earlier sections of article 7 and consolidate some of that. The main part of this ordinance is to reform at the tables in article 7 consist ent with article 2 and deletes in 7 90. There are 4 different sets of use definition 1 section 102, article 7, article 8 and article 4. Hopefully by the ends of this there will be two sets so section 102 and then the one in article dealing with fees and impact fees and things like that which doesnt make sense to consolidate. In 102 there will be multiple definitions . In article 7 office is defined differently than it is in 102. There are more specific definitions to some of the uses. There will be one standard definition for what a office is and there will be one standard definition for every use unless it has a particular app lickability to a fee. That is quhie we leave those in article 4 but office will me office no matter what zone. The other main thing that it does is creates a standard 20 day notice period for cu variances maps and general plan amendments. Currently all other Zoning Districts have a 10 day notice period accept neighborhood commercial with 20 day. Dont know why, it doesnt seem it like it is a big deal to make it 20 university and allows to keep section 316 in the code. It deletes section 316 which goes over how we process conditional use in nairnd commercial district and then takes whatever is missing from section what is useful in the section and puts into 306 which covers all Zoning District so more consistency throughout the code. It also deletes the upper Market Street neighborhood commercial district from the code so when supervisor wiener expanded the upper Market Street to castro street he had to leave out two parcels because he lived within 500 feet of them. We are getting rid of that Zoning District and rezoning the last two parcels for it. The ordnance has amendments particular to sunset neighborhood commercial requested by supervisor Tang Department of working with supervisor tang about with these districts and made sense to fold it into the ordinance. The first would be to require cu for bars and Liquor Stores on ground floor and sunset and cd. They are permitted. The sunset are noriega, taraval [inaudible] it would require cu for personal service on the second floor in the sunset ncd. One concern supervisor tang has is personal service uses are a front for Illicit Activity and on the segd floor which makes it hard toor monitor and enforce. They would be prohibited on the second floor and permitted withconditional use on the second floor and permitted on the ground floor. Other amendments it is a modifying the definition of mobile food facility. It isnt a separate use for planning and rely on department of public works code which regulates mobile food facilities. We are adding just for clarity definition tooz 102 not cunchtsly there such as use characteristic. A use can bow a restaurants a characteristic of the restaurant may be it is formula retail so defining what is a use characteristic is and adding a definition for conditional use principle use and vargence variance. We remove access rery use in 204102. [inaudible] will that remain the same or be the same hrf it is same throughout the code. There is one definition that controls for accessory use probably vary but there there is consolidation with that as well. Mining minor sections with 134 with rear yards. There are Zoning Districts in the wrong place so correcting that. There was a incorrect citing of water born commerce, it should be maritime use so that is just a minor change. Just to go over the structure we came up with for the planning code, we developed 8 overall use categories, agriculture, ought motives [inaudible] retail and non retail and utility infrastructure. Each oof the use groupings is defined in section 102 and lists all the different uses that apply to the section. If you want to know what is in ought motive use it will give all the use listed in there. Also to comp lment that every definition also identified what use category it is in. A Jewelry Store regulated in chine taw town say Retail Service sales and use that and the definition goes on. Similar with religious institution, institutional use thatevery use has a corresponding category. This comes to the zoning control table. It says entertainment arts and recreation with asricates can means not listed below. The first line is not permitted in the Zoning District accept the ones listed below have different controls. Arts activity requires a cu on the ground floor and not permitted on the second and third. Industrial use does vpt a astricate because there are no industrial use in neighborhood commercial. That is pretty much it. It is a large ordinance but just to reform at, consolidate and make the code easier to use. Any questions, . . I think consolidation and help in navigating the code is a good thing so thank you for the presentation. Any member of the public wish to comment . Seeing and hearing none we will close our Public Comment and believe that conclude our hearing, right . The hearing is adjourned. [meeting adjourned] good afternoon commissioners and directors welcome to the joint meeting between the sfmta eight board of directors and the Planning Commission. Item 2, roll call for the Planning Commission mission or antonini speed present johns and, present. Then what, present. Wu, present. Richards, present. Fong, here. Hillis is expected to be absent for the sfmta brinkman present borden, present. Grant hi nikki is absent then shoots to trim present trend ramos, present. Wu rocky, present. Borden present. Mr. Chairman mr. Pres. You have a quorum item 3 announcement of coalitions against sound producing devices during the meeting