That this is part that was offered to bank for the storage fee. And they are readily available and all of that is being asked that they get paid back for the storage fees and so, it seems like a complete waste to throw the stucco up on a Historic Building which may are may not be bank owned rye now. But i would hate to lose what is not just part of that block, but part of the whole atmosphere of what is a San Francisco lawyer, to be a montgomery street lawyer is a status of prestige and to start throwing up stucco is devastating. I have my business cards available for anyone who wishes to know where the bricks are and the current cost of storage is. That is incredible news. Commissioners, Stewart Norton. You got my letter i assume. I have ten copies if you didnt. Thank you. In a nutshell, it says wow, how could this be exempt from the seca review this is not a minor alteration and this is a major thing, by the way you have a really important decision to make on this building, the landm
Markets are not right and i cant urge you strongly enough. There is no one in this room or city more impact and we are on board and we feel that having a green roof is a Wonderful Development in the urban environment and we are behind chicago and new york xh actually require the removal and instead of adding more hvac on and the raising of the height and my understand is to accommodate an elevator that will allow the disabled people to access the roof and so we are on board with this and we urge you to do the same, thank you very much. Any other member of the public, whether you gave us a card or not. Wish to speak . Yeah, you were. We lost one card along the way. I am matsuda, from the 25 holaling hoa, and following up on angelas comments there were only two residential buildings, and we are obviously attracted to the historic square and we support the developer coming on board and taking this project on and seeing the completion of this building. I guess that renovation is a strong w
You previously looked at this, and your recommendation on the stucco was that because the original brick that the location of the original brick was a question. And it was not to be found and so, the next best historic representation would be through stucco, i guess that is the question. Or, does this new information about the possibility location of the original brick would this make me difference in your original consideration about the use of the historic material . At that hearing we were told that the original brick was not available and we felt that the stucco was a better choice than the brick which seemed kind of not an appropriate material in terms that it was just a thick brick and that it was and there seemed to be evidence of those and since i had originally been stucco and so that was our recommendation and so so the brick situation is a new information that we didnt have at that time. If the brick is available or not. Commissioner pearlman . Yeah, i mean, part of the depa
Material . At that hearing we were told that the original brick was not available and we felt that the stucco was a better choice than the brick which seemed kind of not an appropriate material in terms that it was just a thick brick and that it was and there seemed to be evidence of those and since i had originally been stucco and so that was our recommendation and so so the brick situation is a new information that we didnt have at that time. If the brick is available or not. Commissioner pearlman . Yeah, i mean, part of the department had worked with the project sponsor about putting veneer on it and there is the sense that it looks very fake, you know, even a good one looks very thin and the detailing. You know f, even salvaged brick would be better than veneer but that we actually, mr. Norton said in the hearing, ining would be better than the veneer and we kind of had more discussion about it and i think that is part of you know that discussion. Okay. Just so in response to that
Material . At that hearing we were told that the original brick was not available and we felt that the stucco was a better choice than the brick which seemed kind of not an appropriate material in terms that it was just a thick brick and that it was and there seemed to be evidence of those and since i had originally been stucco and so that was our recommendation and so so the brick situation is a new information that we didnt have at that time. If the brick is available or not. Commissioner pearlman . Yeah, i mean, part of the department had worked with the project sponsor about putting veneer on it and there is the sense that it looks very fake, you know, even a good one looks very thin and the detailing. You know f, even salvaged brick would be better than veneer but that we actually, mr. Norton said in the hearing, ining would be better than the veneer and we kind of had more discussion about it and i think that is part of you know that discussion. Okay. Just so in response to that