For the review of supervisor cohens legislation regarding pdr conversion to office in landmark properties. Ultimately, during the discussion of the proposed legislation, the hpc continued the item until its october 2nd hearing. In the interim they are interested in providing a letter to this commission so you know some of the thoughts going on in their heads about how they believe the legislation could be more effective. Some of the questions they still have and staff is working on a response right now. They want to be as useful and possible to the Zoning Administrator as part of staff to this commission as the final deciders on whether or not this pdr should be converted to office. They do have some questions about process. They do want to have a better idea of whats expected to them and they discuss how they could provide some criteria so they are able to discuss the merits of proposals for buildings and how these buildings could be rehabilitated provided the pdr is converted to offi
Legislation regarding pdr conversion to office in landmark properties. Ultimately, during the discussion of the proposed legislation, the hpc continued the item until its october 2nd hearing. In the interim they are interested in providing a letter to this commission so you know some of the thoughts going on in their heads about how they believe the legislation could be more effective. Some of the questions they still have and staff is working on a response right now. They want to be as useful and possible to the Zoning Administrator as part of staff to this commission as the final deciders on whether or not this pdr should be converted to office. They do have some questions about process. They do want to have a better idea of whats expected to them and they discuss how they could provide some criteria so they are able to discuss the merits of proposals for buildings and how these buildings could be rehabilitated provided the pdr is converted to office. Like we said well be providing a
They intend on meeting over the next month and provide specific recommendations how the department and the commissions can implement some of the recommendations in the San Francisco Architectural Heritage white paper on cultural assets. We are happy to relay the information to this commission if the commission does want to participate in that committee. The hearing started with a meeting of the architectural review committee. They reviewed the design for the van ness brt, thats going to run in front of city hall and the portion located within the civic Center Landmark district. As you are probably aware the Historic Preservation commission as well as the Civic Design Review Committee of the Arts Commission reviewed the designs for the improvements and platforms proposed by sbrt. There is still Design Review meetings to take place before either committee or either commission make a final recommendation. Well keep you posted on those results. Ultimately, the commissioner, the Design Revi
The Design Review committee was in support of the project. They did request some more information in particular around replacement trees, minimizing some of the details of the platforms. They had some questions about the canopy structures and the wind screens. We will be preparing a memo of the architectural review committees and recommendations. If you are interested we can forward you a copy. The commission went on to approval for several certificates. They were all approved as recommended by staff. Finally preservation staff gave an overview of all planning code related to preservation. It was more of an informational presentation to set the stage for the review of supervisor cohens legislation regarding pdr conversion to office in landmark properties. Ultimately, during the discussion of the proposed legislation, the hpc continued the item until its october 2nd hearing. In the interim they are interested in providing a letter to this commission so you know some of the thoughts goin
Legislation regarding pdr conversion to office in landmark properties. Ultimately, during the discussion of the proposed legislation, the hpc continued the item until its october 2nd hearing. In the interim they are interested in providing a letter to this commission so you know some of the thoughts going on in their heads about how they believe the legislation could be more effective. Some of the questions they still have and staff is working on a response right now. They want to be as useful and possible to the Zoning Administrator as part of staff to this commission as the final deciders on whether or not this pdr should be converted to office. They do have some questions about process. They do want to have a better idea of whats expected to them and they discuss how they could provide some criteria so they are able to discuss the merits of proposals for buildings and how these buildings could be rehabilitated provided the pdr is converted to office. Like we said well be providing a