Transcripts For SFGTV Historic Preservation Commission 5416

we'll nob nub get you to long term housing. alright? thank you very much. appreciate it. [inaudible] [applause] . >> san francisco huft stork preservation commission regular meeting. i'd like to real estate mind members of the public that the commission does not tolerate outbreaks or disruption of any kind. please silence your mobile dwietions that may sound off during these meetings and when speaking before the commission if you care to please silence. >> wolf ram, yes. commissioner johns, yes. commissioner matsuda, here. commissioner pearlman. members of the public may address the commission on items that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the xlition except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be reached during the meeting. each make-up may address the commission for up to 3 minutes. i have no speaker cards. >> does any make-up wish to make comment on any item not on the agenda? please come forward. seeing and hearing none we will close public comment. >> director's announcements. >> commissioners, good afternoon. i have no new announcements today. the one thing to just mention perhaps is i know you have interest in the affordable housing bonus program. that item is before the board. it's not clear how the board is going to proceed at this point. of course there's a lot of controversy over this item but just to let you know, the hearing will roblly take place sometime in mid-june but as soon as we know we'll let you know. >> thank you. >> seeing nothing else, commissioners, item 2, review of past events at the planning commission, staff report and announcements. >> tim fry, staff. no formal report prosecute planning commission however a couple items to share with you regarding board of supervisors decisions on a couple pending landmarks. the kell house was unanimously approved at the april 22nd board of supervisors hearing and is now landmark no. 270 so that was good news. the bordette building was at land use on april 25th and supervisor peskin asked to be listed as co-sponsor to that ordinance. and the land use committee forwarded a positive recommendation to the full board which unanimously approved the landmark designation at yesterday's hearing, so there will be a second hearing next week then on to the mayor, so the two pending landmark designations at the board look to be resolved. and that concludes my report unless you have any comments. >> commissioners, seeing none, we can move on. item 3. >> no report or announcements. >> item 4, consideration of adoption of draft minutes for april 20, 2016. i have one minor change, adding s to the end of the title. >> it was a very short meeting. >> any other comment? does any make-up wish to comment on the draft meeting minutes for april 20, 2016, hearing and seeing none we will close public comment and do i have a motion. >> so move ?ood ?oo second. >> thank you, commissioners, to adopt the meeting minutes for april 20, 2016. (roll called). >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7-0 and places us on item 5, commission comments and questions. >> commissioner pearlman. >> thank you. does anyone know these people? i wanted to disclose that i had a conversation with andrew junius who is representing the 235 -- one side of the 235 valencia issue that we're going to discuss later today. >> add to that, i also had a conversation with him. >> commissioner hunt? >> update on the waterfront land use update plan. commissioner john and i are on this with mike beuhler who i see in the audience. the agenda item last week, mark pious from the port gave a pretty lengthy history, overview, and there were a few other presenters but it was predominately just an informational session and we have two more meetings in this first phase and then it will good into the second phase where we get into more of the policies, delving into the details so you will be updated. >> thank you. i can add on to that i have requested the port provide us an informational presentation on the pier 70 project, given it's well underway with horton development undertaking the preds vaition of numerous buildings in the city before starting their process. mark pious has arranged that. commissioner john. >> i'd like to add to that, actually it's quite exciting at the port with the presence of the three of us on the working group and advisery group. i think we're captured the attention of staff, not just mark who is chief preservation officer there, but all the staff are listening very intently to our -- as we build some information base and recommendations and we'll be bringing that, you know, more to you and perhaps as we get to the recommendation area of the planning process we're, we hope to have some really good recommendations. >> thank you. any other comments, questions? no, we can move on. >> very good, commissioners, that will place us on item 6, the legacy business registry informational update. >> hi, commissioners, shelly (inaudible) preservation staff. i don't have a long presentation for you today. i wanted to note that today's agenda gives you the opportunity to review case report templates for the registry applications that will start coming to you later this year. to date the mayor's office of small business has received approximately 16 applications for the legacy business registry and we expect that these applications will be 230rded -- forwarded to the historic preservation commission in june so coming up quickly. we thought this would be a good time to firm up the review process so in the packet you were sent this week we forwarded to you a case report template with a draft resolution template draft exhibits and a sample application. this application is just for reference and we're not considering the appropriateness of the application during this matter. so if you could keep your comments just to the application templates themselves. and i'm available if you have any questions. >> thank you. any questions for miss contra before we take public comment? commissioner matsuda. >> can you tell me what kind of promotion has been done around this? i only have 16 applicants seems, i know it's still in the early stages, but this was on the ballot, this was something that several supervisors promoted and put some money to and it just seems odd that there are so few who are participating. is it because of the way in which you need to submit the application, any information on that? >> tim fry and i did meet with regina, who is director of the small business office. we did not talk about promoting the program at this point. my understanding is that there's no staffing yet available in the small business office other than regina to run the program, and so their office has not made many attempts at outreach and promoting the program simply because we don't have the, the city doesn't have the staffing to process the applications yet. but in the next couple of weeks or months we will, those positions will be filled and we'll be more capable of processing the applications. xwropb if any promotional activities in supervisors' offices or any such thing. >> commissioners? >> it's only one of two way that is a business can submit, right, to participate, through a supervisor or through the mayor's office. >> they need sponsorship, yes. >> just those two ways. >> correct. commissioners just to add to what miss contra mentioned as you see from the memo, it seems that now she has secured funding for this additional staff member that, as she says at the end of the memo, now there is funding to develop a logo and a brand identity for the registry it sounds like their intention now is to move forward on promoting it. the application is on the office of small business web site. it's not promoted on the main page but it's under their applications list of links so we're not sure about what sort of active promotion they are doing at this time, but based on the meeting with regina it sounds like something is going to happen in the near future. >> and what happens if people on this commission would like to recommend businesses? how did that work? >> if you'd like to forward that information to us, we are happy to forward it to the appropriate supervisors, or you may want to speak to those supervisors as well. >> i see a representative from one of the supervisors' offices, would you come forward? >> thank you so much, commissioner matsuda, for that question. that's precisely why, one of the main reasons i'm here today. my name is hillary ronin, i am supervisor david campos' chief of staff. supervisor campos called for a meeting that will be held before the business and oversight meeting and just to provide some perspective in numbers, the board of supervisors over a year ago passed unanimously the creation of the registry. nine supervisors have nominated 54 businesses to the registry. our first nomination from our office with a completed application was submitted to the office of small business in january and not one single business has been placed on the registry. this is at a time, and you are all acutely aware, where rents for businesses are sky rocketing, the cost of doing business in san francisco is rising every day, there's no commercial rent control and many businesses are closing down because they are unable to hire staff that can survive with the incredibly high housing and transportation costs. so the implementation of this program could not be more critical and yet we are not seeing action out of the office of small business and the office of economic work force development that you would think you see when the voters approved by 60 percent a measure like proposition j, which is one of the few tools available to help small businesses and our legacy businesses that provide so much historically important service to our city desperately need. so given there's a public hearing on this, i'm surprised there is no one here, for example, from the office of economic and work force development and as we all recently read in an article in hud line director dickon dreesy said she has been understaffed, she has been told by her commission to implement the program in her spare time and she has no spare time to implement it. so we're very concerned that this is the treatment the city and what we're seeing out of the office of the mayor in terms of the importance of this program and we hope that you'll pay attention because the response from the historic preservation commission has been very different, it's been very involved and hands-on and i am here from supervisor campos to thank you so much for that, for recognizing the importance of this legislation and reviewing the example memo and recommendation. it just looks fantastic, it's very thorough and the fact you are recommending very explicitly sort of the features of the businesses to maintain forward going in the future is extremely helpful. really just coming here with gratitude for this commission for recognizing the importance in taking your role very seriously in this legislation and alerting you to the fact that that's not happening through the office of economic and work force development and the office of small business and we are going to draw attention and ask some really hard questions about that on may 19th in case you are available to attend. it's at 9.30 at the government audit and oversight committee. >> thank you, miss ronin does any member of the public wish to comment on this item? if so, please come forward. >> hi, we have known from supervisor aaron peskin's office, thank you to my colleague, hillary ronin, i think she put it pretty suck sipgtly. i am working with two businesses who were nominated specifically with the thought that their leases expire the end of may and they are seeking the assurance they can provide to their landlords for an incentive to enter into a long-term lease and this process has just been disoriented, alienating, i am running out of promises for these businesses that have been relying on this for the last 4 months. we met here 3 1/2 months ago, i am discouraged not one application has been presented to the historic preservation commission, it's really sad. the flip side of having 16 applications apply, that's only 16 applications to move forward, it's not like you are sitting on 400. by you i mean of course the other entities implicated in this as well. i really am grateful to the historic preservation commission, i think the draft resolution prepared for this is very good, i am encouraged the sample applicant even though they didn't hit every single box, for example, being associated with a culturally significant event, they were nevertheless recommended for inclusion on the registry. i think that's accurate, i don't think every business is going to be as good and successful at checking all those boxes but nevertheless should be included on the registry. so thank you all, i'm looking forward to the hearing on may 19 *t and getting some of those applications forward as soon as possible. >> thank you, thank you very much. mr. beuhler. >> good afternoon, commissioners, mike beuhler with heritage. heritage obviously shares the frustration voiced by previous speakers regarding the slowness of implementation of the legacy business registry. to answer commissioner matsuda's question, one of the explanations for so few applications is there have been literally no information available to the public as to how to apply. our office received many inquiries from businesses interested in being added to the registry. we literally had nowhere to point them to in terms of looking at application form that was only posted on the office of small business web site i think in march and as tim mentioned, it's fairly difficult to find. i would encourage the department to link to that application material and promote it in conjunction with its other work related to cultural heritage assets. i think the department is certainly more on top of this than other parts of city government right now and i think that would be a simple step that could be taken. with respect to the draft template before you, i agree that i think it's excellent and it is clear. my one thing that i did note in terms of the features and the list of features and traditions in this sample template, unless i miss something, it appears it's only physical features that are listed here, although there is the opportunity to list traditions and i would, you know, i think it would be helpful for the commission to elaborate on what types of traditions would be appropriate to include as the nominations come before you. thanks for your continued attention on this and hope to see some nominations soon. thank ?ue ?oo thank you, any other make-up wish to comment on this item? hearing and seeing none we will close public comment and bring it back to commissioner highland. >> follow-up on commissioner matsuda's point. i think, shelly and tim, you can provide some further details, but i believe they are still trying to decide when and how to schedule the applications, if it's going to be an annual process or just a continual process and it hasn't really been decided yet. as a deadline --. >> at the small business commission? we're not clear about that. i don't think regina has given us that information, do you know? >> i can only speak to the process that regina and we talked about during our last meeting, which was that a batch of applications would be forwarded to us as early as next week and that we would expect to calendar all of those for a single hearing, a single item for action, but at one hearing and i think we've put a place holder on the july -- sorry -- the first hearing in june in case they are ready to go. >> right, and we are trying to see, waiting and seeing how many applications there would be to determine to process. >> correct. i think staff feels at least in the beginning of the program where it looks like we might have many applications to process in a quick amount of time that putting them together in batches and trying to schedule hearings at least once a month. >> and the legislation allows 200 per year? >> three hundred per year. >> so we're really woefully --. >> we're below that. one, i want to reiterate this commission's interest in this and willingness to help out in any way. our cultural assets committee has reached out. we're available. we can angendize anything we need either at the committee level or hspc, i would encourage both supervisor campos and supervisor peskin to reach out to us as well and keep that moving forward. then to follow up on mr. beuhler's comments about the physical features and traditions, that's exactly what i was thinking as well and i would also encourage maybe to be a little more selective in the physical attributes that are identified because we don't want to be limiting the ability for these businesses to evolve and change and the importance is really the egg -- legacy and the intangible traditions that the businesses bring to the city. so a little bit different than a landmark nomination list of character-defining features. >> commissioner john. >> well, it sounds like i think we just discussed this last time, write in to the mayor and say we want some attention on this. it sounds like this is a mess, which unfortunately or it's just not getting going and what kind of help does this person need? >> if i may i think we're happy to take your concerns back to the mayor's office of economic -- first of all, where the small business commission lives. i think they are just, they are basically getting geared up and it's taken them a while to get geared up to administer this program, to be fair. that's my only thought there but i'm happy to take that message back to them and make sure that office knows your concerns and how important you think this program is. >> if that, you know, do we need to do something more than that? i mean we're all appointees, you know, of the mayor so it would be logical. >> i would support a --. >> a letter, yeah. >> asking for some attention. >> for all of us to sign it, yeah. >> commissioner. >> i had a question to miss -- when you say bring them as a batch would that be like the mills act where we have 8 of them and that's just one angendized item and they are all subbed so we have to review all of those at the same time so we're ing to look at a good enough number so we can start getting to, start building the number that goes through. >> that's correct. you would be required to approve each individual resolution for each application. however, you could do that i think as a single motion. >> thanks. >> mr. fry. >> commissioners, back to commissioner highland's comments, those are very helpful and we would benefit from a little bit more direction on the feature section because this is something we all struggled with. the applicant has an opportunity to list features that they feel are important with the business and then we added our own and we didn't want to edit the features the applicant had added there because they know their business better than anybody, but if there's any guidance or suggestions that you could give us in terms of what we should keep an eye out for or what we can tell applicants that this commission would be interested in, we'll certainly pass that information along. right now we were focused primarily on physical features that we thought we could add there, but we completely agree with you, i mean just in this example the fact they had outlined vinyl flooring as being something easy to clean, vinyl flooring isn't something that jumps to a preservationist's mind as something worthy to protect. >> commissioner matsuda. >> i'd like to follow-up on mr. buehler's comments if we can add a link and secondly i don't think we have a cultural heritage assets committee meeting planned, right? we haven't thought of a new date but maybe we should schedule one soon and make this a priority for us to discuss and hopefully encourage people to, businesses in vair quus communities to come forward and share their ideas about this as well. >> commissioners, other comments about the template or -- commissioner hyland. >> just one response to your comment, mr. fry. maybe it's just as simple as us responding to each application and offering advice on how to include items that convey what's important about the business yet not list something that can't change. i mean that's the balance that needs to be drawn. so i would expect that the sheet vinyl flooring is probably important for the process of the business but does it really convey the essence of the space. >> but certain things like their brand identity or the name of the business or their signage may convey other things about it or the way they produce a certain product. commissioner pearlman. >> could there be something similar to what we have with the arc that these applicants could seek the advice of the cultural heritage assets committee so that there would be a way for them to address this issue and then there could be a discussion the way we have a discussion at the arc about features and other item that is they could then have help with their application in that way? >> sure. >> that would streamline the process when it came to the full commission because it would have already been reviewed. >> sure, that's possible. that's a good idea. >> that would be great. >> so to conclude this item i'm hearing a strong consensus we would like to write a letter, are we in agreement, to the mayor's office. so i think, i would encourage director when they speak with the mayor's office to express our concerns but i think in addition to that we'll write a letter outlining some of the things we brought up today about the importance of the program and our desire to have it being a streamlined program that's easy to use, easy to access and well staffed. >> commissioners, is that something you would like staff to provide a draft for your review? okay, then we'll bring it to the full commission at the next hearing. >> we could probably just have it come to my attention. >> get it off before --. >> all right, i think we're ready to move on. >> thank you, commissioners, that will place us under your regular calendar with item 7. landmark designation work program, status of pipeline projects. >> good afternoon, commissioners, susan parks, department staff. the item before you today is a quarterly update on the status of the landmark designation program. as usual i'll go through the work program of items that have recently come before us and those xhekted to come before you in the coming months, i'll give you an idea of the performance measure that is we're tracking. in the (inaudible) no designations were finalized during that quarter. as mr. fry mentioned, two landmarks have moved forward at the board since the end of this reporting quarter. as far as our other active designations you initially designated a landmark designation for the alleghany work center. you also chose not to initiate designation for 235 valencia street. later this afternoon two more initial identifications will come before you for ingleside church. in mid-july staff intends to bring forward one more for the sacred heart church,s initial identification for the pace plaza continues to remain on hold as well as the sailor's union so we're awaiting direction from hpc all of these projects are in our active pipe luepb. we're proposing to come back to you at the june 1st hearing to do a short term reprioritization of the program that will take us through the summer. after that we'd rake to come back and do a long-term repriorization that includes some of the products from the cultural heritage and recpbtly adopted survey. one of our summer products is an internship for underrepresented communities to create a cultural assets work program which will inform your landmark work program later this fall. in addition to this, serving staff will be supervising two internships this summer, one for the creation of an excelsior statement and one in honor of mary brown, the mary brown internship which is for the roussou tract. those are identified as part of the sunset survey. department staff also continues to serve aztec any cal support to the technical survey. the residents parks, historic context statement, corbett heights, eureka valley and recently the hpfc also completed funding for the survey. we will begin work on the national park service grant and we're currently applying for a 2016-2017 clg grant for the creation of a context statement on water in san francisco. lastly, to better track the status of article 10 the following performance measures were established, first that will prepare within 150 staff hours, we've had no new sdig naises to report on during this quarter, second, prepare an orl 10 which we did. we also showed you a revised flow chart that wasn't included in your packets but i can bring back to you at that june 1st hearing. and third that we'll provide landmark designation application information regarding the completeness of their projects and schedule those hearings for all mribses within 30 days. staff thought the woodward street application 36 days after we determined it was complete and should be brought to hearing. 235 valencia street was brought to you after 130 days and a continuance. and lastly that will make taipb this quarterly report. the next quarterly report is expected to come to you in the first hearing in july. thoets are active cases so just reference the packet and we'll come back to you with our feelings about it in june and we'll have a further discussion about it then. that concludes my comments. >> i have a question, just a procedure one, about the two schools, the theater roosevelt middle school and the george washington high school. maybe it's for mr. fry. we don't have any jurisdiction over the school properties. what would happen, is this sort of symbolic designation? >> for the most part, yes. there's a number of state-owned public schools that are currently city landmarks and it's sometimes sought out by the principle principle and the student body which is more recent, other times by the public or part of a larger district like i. m. scott school. it is mainly an honorary distinction however it has provaidd some leverage in talking to the school district about certain changes that they make, especially with their seismic and rehabilitation efforts that are under way in particular one of the schools that's listed for designation it will be going through its design phase for its seismic upgrade very soon and we've asked them as part of that designation to come to this body or at least arc to weigh in on some of those changes. >> okay, was going to request, perhaps, it wouldn't be bad to have somebody from the school district maybe talk about that and other properties. i've been surprised by some of the schools made at certain schools. >> yes, and we have been very interest ned history as well and we have been attending their board members and sharing the designation materials with them so i anticipate at those hearings they will participate. >> thank you. commissioner john. >> i've been interested in the commission statement on water. oh, it's clg >> think it will be a big help as we undertake the city-wide survey, talk about infrastructure and development. >> thank you very much. at this time we'd take public comment on the landmark designation work program. if you have comment, please come forward. >> commissioner, i'm jim half, i've appeared before you a number of times pointing out some of the earlier landmark designations were done by amateurs or full of incomplete and errors and probably need to be redone. certainly the civic center bun 17 -- one for the admission of john galen howard is quite prominent. since we're talking about schools, landmark 140 which iss the school building district, listed as the tharpe building, is totally screwed up. i have written a number of letters over the past 20 years about it. it gives little credit to john reed, junior, who actually designed the bulk of the buildings. it also said he designed them as spanish colonial revival which is a good guess at the time but today we have much more access to stuff and i ran across an issue of a magazine put out by the mcbean company called shapes of clay. grady mcbean was a principle supplier for terra cotta in california and it lists all the buildings we're working on and it says the building at 135 van ness, john reed decided not to use a spanish motif but a french based on the chateau at blaugh all of this could be academic but the school district is involved in a very expensive remodeling of that block which will result in an exciting new home for the arts. however, if they are trying to repair some of the existing buildings and the designation is spanish colonial revival, they would then have to try to force that into what they are thinking of when it's really a french building. so this is not just casual. so my request is your work program should be amended to include an aspect to review a number of the early landmark designations in light of the resources we have today and perhaps revise them where necessary. thank you. >> thank you. does any other member of the public wish to comment on this item? >> my name is l. doris cameron and i want to say i was a former of i. m scott and also former principal at roosevelt middle school and both of those buildings are very beautiful and worthy of some type of historic dez designation for preservation. any other member of the public wish to comment on this item? seeing none we will bring it back to the commission. any other comments about the landmark program? commissioner john. >> i think mr. hasz raised an interesting and good point. if we could put in the program some provision for looking back at what was done at a time when the scholarship wasn't as good as it is currently, i think that could be very helpful. >> further comment? commissioner hyland. >> i wanted to commend staff on the report again. the format is really easy to follow and able to get the information needed to see the status of things very quickly. thank you. >> commissioner john. >> quickly to follow up on commissioner hasz and commissioner john. to the staff, how would you do that, that is a big job. get a grant, an rfp or something. >> tim fry, staff. it would be quite an undertaking we don't necessarily disagree with mr. hasz' comments, we do find that some of the early designations are lacking in information or has some small errors. as you'll see towards the end of the hearing we have an amendment to an older designation and we could perhaps revisit them time to time but we certainly look to you to help guide us on which ones, which existing landmarks could possibly be a priority to fix. i mean we have a great deal more information about civic center, for example, with the recent survey work there so that could be another logical next candidate. >> also i would encourage mr. hasz, he's done a great job in sniting -- submitting information to us before and we always welcome that. >> seeing no further comments we will move on. >> item 8, the african american historic context statement, consider to adopt, modify or disapprove. >> before we start this item we have received numerous requests for a continuance of this item. so what i'd like to propose is that we hear the item, hear public comment of the item so we can get input into it, discuss the item but then continue it and do not make a motion, do not adopt a motion on it today. if in general agreement that's how we're proceed and then at the conclusion of the item we can vote to continue. we do have members of the public here to speak about it today so we want to get their input about it. okay, we will proceed that way. miss sparks. >> good afternoon, commissioners, susan parks, department staff. since the item is continued i'm going to take a minute just to talk to you about context statements, how the department uses them and walk you through the african american context statement a little bit. in contrast to a narrative history, a context statement connects people and places to the built environment. it creates a framework to help planners if the building contains (inaudible) list of identified properties for potential landmarks or for national registry nominations. statements included in this are consistent with those included in other cultural context statements and they include tools for preservation and tools that will help with cultural and social preservation such as the legacy business fund or the creation of special use districts or a recommendation for educational programs or assistance that other city agencies offer. context statements also provide a foundation for our survey and our future research efforts. for instance, coming out of this survey we'd love to know more about african american churches and storefront churches in particular. we'd like to know more about the newspaper and publishing industry and its association with african american and even vernacular settlements in areas where people first lived and if there are any remnants of that remaining and maybe though there are things we can undertake in the future but we feel as it stands that the context statement is a valuable tool for staff for our valuation and going forward as we undertake the city-wide survey and the creation of a city-wide context statement at the end of this summer. con tebs statements can also be used to form the department's future planning efforts including the creation of economic incentive or special use districts like you've seen in japan town. to provide you with a really quick overview of the african american historic context statement, each chapter is an era in history including it starts at the alta california period, goes into the gold rush through the earthquake, post earthquake up until world war ii, then world war ii into the 60's and then the 60's and the 80's with all the civil rights movements and then in more recent decades it documents the african american exodus from san francisco since 1980. within each of these chapters we've created a background history for context, including, we've included residential patterns, employment patterns, civic institutions such as lodges, churches, klubs, organizations and cultural contributions. we try to highlight artists, musicians, club owners, churches and pastors. if you can follow along and turn to page 111 of your draft document, you can see we've included a clubs and the night life that was once along fillmore street. we document which buildings are extant, which have been demolished. another example if you take a look at page 68, you can see a history of mary mccann stewart, this is just something that came out of our research and we've turned it into this portrait of african american life which are just biographies of stories and people that we've found to be interesting. we tried to do these recuring themes throughout each era of development and then on the thing that we've tried to do is to recap each section by including a list of properties that have been mentioned and their status, extapbt or not. on page 161 you can see an example of that. we also try to include any known honorary plaques, interpretations, any other exhibit known in the city. all this information and biographies and places are included and can serve as a flag for planners who are doing future evaluative efforts and for us on the survey team as we identify landmarks. in january, 2016, we did post the final document to our web site. we did send out emailed notices and when things are posted the followers at the web site are notified. and then we worked with mr. williams at the historic and cultural society and at his request the february 17th hearing was continued. that puts us at today's date but we have, since that time public comment has been opened. since early january we have been accepting comments and in the last couple weeks we have received several letters that have had very useful suggestions and additions and we're really happy to make those changes and include those suggestions in the final document. some of those in particular came from mr. templeton, mr. williams and frankie gillette who commented on your packet. i also, since you received the packet two times you have had separate comment letters. so i made packets just of comment letters if you want to pass those around today. we have heard from the community and we do understand that they want more time, they want us to explain the document to them and they would like to have some sort of public meeting or debut of the document. so in response it that we plan to continue to receive public comment letters up until that hearing or that meeting which, based on our schedule, we expect that to take place in july and then we'll come back to you hopefully at the end of the summer in august for an adoption hearing. that concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. commissioners, questions? commissioner hyland. >> one question. i wanted to do this more of a comment question before public comment so if any member s of the public have any organization they can help us. i understand liz ogbooth did some oral history in hunters point and possibly pier 70. i know we talked about this before and i was reluctant to bring it up because i thought there was a lot of effort already put into this and wasn't sure how much more staff could do to improve it, but i noticed it in one of the letters they talked about printing or publishing some of the oral histories. so if that were to go forward i would suggest reaching out to liz ogbooth and i'm happy to make the connection. >> that would be helpful. >> are there questions? we'll take public comment and then we'll come back to the commission. at this time we'll take public comment on this item. i have some speaker cards that i will call first and you will have 3 minutes and then 30 seconds before your time is up there will be a warning bell. al williams. >> good afternoon, commissioners, i'm al williams, president of the board of directors of the san francisco african american historical and cultural society. for the record i'm also a member of the team that pulled, that was responsible for the drafting of the -- led by tim kelly consulting a draft of the context statement. i'm here today not as a member of the team but speaking on my role of the historic cal society. for more than 60 years the society has been a leading entity in san francisco whose job was documenting and preserving the history of the african american people in san francisco. i am here to share with you some of our conclusions on the african american context statement. we did send a letter which i believe you received. we want to start off by thanking the commission and the staff for accepting our recommended suggestion for extending the time frame for comment. we do think that was very important and has resulted in additional information coming forward that will make the context statement even stronger. during our annual meeting on april 24th, the society devoted its entire meeting to discussion of the context statement. because. length of the document we asked various people to read various sections of it and provide comments, which we then assembled and turned in. we also continued to receive comments as well so we're pleased to note that a great deal of the context statement is based upon research that was done in the society's archives. unfortunately researchers can't access those materials now, those archives, because we don't have enough space to house them. based upon our discussions at the society and other society's members present at the annual meeting, there was unanimous support for the adoption of the content of the african american city-wide context statement. based on those discussions and feedback from others we were also unanimous in the belief that there was considerable room for improving the document and that not enough outreach had been done to inform the community, african american be community in particular and broader community in general, about the availability of the document. as miss parks indicated in her remarks it was posted on the web site and emails went out to followers of the web site, which would be a very limited population in this context. in any event, we support the notion of continuing the hearing. we would urge you not just to continue in terms of having a meeting, but to look at strategies for broader outreach over a period of time that goes xwropbd just one community meeting. we would also recommend you include in your final decision when that takes place a requirement for there to be an annual update to the statement because as it becomes more popular and known, the fore--. >> you can continue. it's important that we get --. >> thank you. well, the final recommendation was simply that there be some provision made for some way of on-going updating of the document. because while this document isn't intended to be the history of african american be in san francisco, a lot of people will read it as such and as the information about it does get further disseminated, more and more information will come up. for example, i'm sure reverend brown will mention the margaret joseph house on pierce between mcallister and fulton across from third baptist which i don't believe is referenced in the document, but is an important house where african americans stayed when they came to san francisco when they couldn't stay at the fairmont an other places. that kind of information is something that occurred later in the process so we appreciate the opportunity for later participation and the historical society remains willing to work with the department in any way we can to make this happen. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. dr. fannie preston. >> well, you've heard my name so i've been a volunteer, though, with the african american historic cal and cultural society for more than 15 years. the african american context statement is really a comprehensive overview of the history of african americans in san francisco. it is something that we have needed and wanted for a long time so it is good to see. while the report has many strengths, it also has many omissions, gaps and mischaracterizations. but it is a useful document and we are glad to see that it has been produced. here are four examples of how we will use it and benefit from it. no. 1, we will use the report as a framework for organizing our archival collection of documents and oral histories. no. 2, we will use the report as a curriculum guide for the youth program we are initiating in collaboration with the african american art and culture complex. we will use this document to make a case for funding a feasibility study sdaipbed to plan incremental steps the city can take toward significant implementation of the slavery ordinance that was passed by the board of supervisors november 8th, 2007. we support and encourage the publication of context statements for the other ethnic groups in the city because the sharing of these publications will enhance cross-cultural understanding, build relationships and collaboration and move us toward a productive multi cultural system that we all want. we commend the board of supervisors for establishing this commission. we congratulate you for having the foresight to produce this report. the staff and consultants did an excellent job researching and writing this report. but we cannot stop there. as mr. williams indicated, we hope that this report will fulfill its promise by becoming a living document. there will annual reviews, yearly updates, published in monographs or caucasianal papers to make corrections, fill in gaps. again the san francisco african american historical society is the standard bearers for african americans, as al indicated, it has held this position for 60 years. again we want to continue to be involved in this process and to identify for you other important constituents to be contacted. bee hope -- we hope our offer of help will be accepted. >> carl williams. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is carl will iams. i'm a member of the board of directors of the african american historical and cultural society and i suppose as a matter of disclosure, although my last name is williams i'm not related to the president. the society did submit a letter and comment and i ask that you have your staff give careful consideration to the comments in particular that we had made for this reason: miss parks in her remarks to you indicated that this document, which we believe is a great document, she indicated that they were not involved in narrative history in connecting the african american experience to buildings and sites. i differ with that because you can't tell the history of african americans in this city or anywhere else without engaging in narration. narration simply connects through tellings and the draft that is here in front of you is replete with examples of narration, some of it mischaracterized and i think the mischaracterization, and we point that out in our comments, the mischaracterization of web dubois is almost a historical statement. it does not give proper credence to one of the founders of african american intellectual history in america and if you do nothing else when this document comes out i ask that the mischaracterization of web dubois be corrected and in our comments to you, and that is at page 133 in the document and our comments we bring that to your attention. second -- time. okay, i just want to reiterate again that i think you must have a wider public discussion of this document in the african american community as it moves along. thank you. >> thank you. doris cameron. >> president wolfram and san francisco historic preservation commissioners, my name is l. doris cameron and i am a member of african american be historical and cultural society. my member was a member when it started in 1955 so the appreciation for the preservation of african american history is inbred in me. i thank the commission for recognizing the history of african americans in san francisco in undertaking this worthy project to document historic sites of african americans. i hope that the historic sites include frederick douglas plaza, located on pier street between oak and fell street with the victorian buildings on the block where african americans found home, and whitney young circle in hunters point where my family and many african american families first found homes in hunters point when our families migrated to san francisco finding jobs in the shipyards. (inaudible) all open in 1852 and they must be given due recognition. in 1977 i took a friend along with me to photograph approximate sites in the financial and chinatown districts where african americans once found homes, businesses and opened a school. these sites were documented in the walking tour of the black presence in san francisco in the 19th century by elizabeth l. parker and james abazian i still have slides of those sites that were made into a slide show in 1978. i hope addendums can be added to this significant document that is scheduled to be approved today. that can include fred wick douglas plaza, whitney young circle, as well as 5123 third street, the location of officers for justice organization when black officers were fighting for justice within the police department. did i hear the bell? >> new york city you still have 30 seconds. >> it is also extremely important that john templeton, historian, be allowed to add his expertise to the african american city-wide statement. my sister, a san francisco resident and society member, could not be present so she submitted this document to president wolfram by email and i gave a copy to your staff for consideration. thank you for your time. >> dr. amos brown. >> mr. chairman, members of the commission, my name is amos brown. i've been the senior pastor of the historical third baptist church for 40 years. i'm the 17th pastor, 164 years this outstanding institution has been in existence which i might say, parenthetically, along with beverly first zion organized in 1852, not just together and clap one's hands to sing and shout and give preachments about heaven, a place that we've never been to and nobody's come back to tell us how it is up there. but it was founded on august the first, 1852 as a celebration of the abolition of slavery in the british west indies. that institution has never had a split in 164 years and i surmise that it is because it has always been focused on justice and the welfare of people. i wish to say that i commend my friends and colleagues in the struggle, al williams, carl williams, miss cameron and also my dear elder, sister preston. while the work they have done across the span of the years and i thank the group for trying to put things in context. but i would remind us all that in mississippi, where i came from, there was an old adage. if a task is once begun, never leave it till it's done, either labor great or small, do it well or not at all. another sacred adage was there's one rule that's -- one room that's never filled and that is the ram for improvement. my friends, let me end by saying since i've been giving warning that i have additional evidence here that i will pass out to you that can only be said is well done until we include the fact that on april the 13th, 1858, over 800 african americans climbed aboard the ship, the commodore, that negly was captain of because life had become so unbearable in san francisco for black people. we couldn't serve on juries, no schools were available for us. couldn't get a job. and there was just meanness in the town. but in 1858, my first predecessors, the first african american, charles satchel, who came over the oregon trail in 1856 to assume the pastorate of that church, he was a leader of the abolitionist movement, a colleague of john mercer langston, the great uncle of langston hughes who wrote the little ditty i swear to the lord i still can't see why democracy means everybody but mean. it was not a democratic society for us then. why, because the first governor of this state was such an arch racist, peter burnett, who, when he settled up in the oregon territory in the early 1830's established a little town called germantown. his first act of business, ladies and gentlemen, was not how --. >> thank you very much. >> let me finish this point. it was not how roads should be built, not how taverns should be built, but it was an order that no black person be permitted to settle in that hamlet and if they were caught there they would be beater every six months until they left town. why am i citing this history? african americans have exceled in spite of that kind of toxic, mean racist attitude and done an outstanding job and we should make sure that in this contextual statement it is mentioned that we achieved in spite of that and to the end that we would remember, dubois, hall robison, martin luther king, and many other notables stayed in a house at 809 --. >> sir, thank you very much. thank you very much. >> and i might say lovingly right here and respectfully i hope the next time i come before this commission there's a black face on it. >> thank you. larry rare. >> good afternoon, commissioners, ladies and gentlemen present, my name is larry rare, i've been fortunately blessed, my mother, dorothy mitchell, my father who was the first pastor. i've been a historian for 50 years and a poet over 50 years. i'm the one who founded the poetry programs over 50 years ago at the bayview bed and branch and also i founded african american history programs there. i was the founder and project director and project manager of the bayview history preservation project, worked closely with linda brooks burton. i also work close with mr. herrera and the staff there and i was one of the strongest advocates to suggest that city-wide we should proat the time and preserve the culture, history and integrity of all neighborhoods throughout this city in the bay area because every neighborhood has its own original, unique and distinct characteristics a and i want to speak, we came here from georgia to california and san francisco in 1957 i attended sir francis drake elementary school, now malcolm x. academy. since i was a young man i was always impressed by the business people and pastors and everyone in the community, elder and i learned a lot truly enriched with wisdom. a lot of pioneers and trail blazers are dying off and i think people in the community around the neighborhood they call me the historian and a poet because i chronicle and document the history of our people and everybody for over 50 years. it's so important, like -- i got a chance to meet a lot of people like mosai hardware going on 80 years, archie reynolds, club long island that caught fire recently. club long island i documented 60 rhythm and blues performers, etta james, i can do roll call but the bayview hunters point be neighborhood has been an african community and fillmore has been totally not represented but i remember people in the fillmore like vince morris, uptown clothier, we could have safe passage to go to any neighborhood. we go play at the beach. young people they should be free to go to any neighborhood without being scared and like the elderly people look --. >> thank you very much. thank you. any other member of the public wish to comment on this item? if so, please come forward. seeing and hearing none -- yes? mr. kelly >> commissioners, tim kelly, i am a historical resources consultant. i would like to mention i think a technical point and hope for affirmation from mr. fry on this. and that is that in the interim while this context statement is being amended or, you 30e, being considered for adoption, the draft actually exists as a part of the record and would be brought to bear in any planning decisions related to resources mentioned. am i right? >> is that an accurate statement? >> commissioner, tim fry, department staff. yes, any information that is part of the record we would use. for instance in review of a new project for the purposes of ceqa clearance so the draft statement could be used as a base line, although we would acknowledge it hadn't been adopted yet. >> thank you. that question had arisen and i just wanted to put it on the record. thank you. >> thank you. any other member of the public wish to make public comment? seeing and hearing none we will close public comment and bring it back to the commissioners. commissioners, we are continuing this item but if there is comment this would be a good time to have it. commissioner john be. >> i thought the comments that were submitted were very, very helpful. i was an attorney for and a friend of reverend boswell and i appreciate that you focused on some of the, his accomplishments that could have been and i think should be more broadly discussed. so that was very good. there are a number of other comments that were made and i, for one, am very anxious to make sure that the statement is the very best that we can make it. >> thank you. commissioner jaupk. >> echoing those comments from commissioner john, i would agree that statement should be the best and i have no doubt that the department and the consult tapbtd team and the folks within the community are going to make it that way. i was interested in the idea of the living nature of the -- this context statement as well as others that we've done and the idea of having some kind of annual review or putting it up, you know, on the web site -- of course it will be part of the record, but the idea of amending it or adding to it, did we have a procedure for that? or something that we we can do. >> tim fry, department staff. no, there is no current procedure. however, other context statements have been amended by this commission once new information or a substantial amount of information has come to light. for instance, the modern design context statement as we move into areas of the recent past in the late 60's, early 70's, we have been talking about amending that just to reflect that history and provide a planning tool for planners to use in making decisions and evaluating properties. it certainly can be done in this case. we would have to come up with a regular process so something like that wouldn't fall between the cracks, but we could have, schedule something on an annual basis where this commission and the public have an opportunity to submit additional information and it comes to light so that it's amended, incorporated therein. >> i would be interested in that but i welcome other comments from commissioners on that. >> commissioner matsuda. >> thank you. i just wanted to thank the member s of the public who came out today to share your comments with us and the emails that we received. i was part of a historic context statement planning process not too long ago and i know that it is very important to have community input and i know that miss parks did a great job in putting this to the and i hope you can see that as a great foundational framework and work to improve it and to help the planning department and us to get as wide of a community input as possible so that you can feel proud of this document and feel proud that it's your own and it will really reflect the community that you represent. i'm sure that miss parks will let us know when that community meeting is scheduled and i'm sure some of us, if we can make it, will probably attend that. >> thank you. i would like to say myself that i learned a lot reading this document about history that i didn't know that much about and was, there was tremendous injustice in that history and it's well documented in the document. one concern i had in there were some of the sections in the area that i actually do more about and i was concerned a little bit about i won't say extensive narration or personal opinion of the author. for example, here is a statement that urban renewal is essentially a property tax finance slush fund for private real estate developers instead of -- it had laudable goals but it was essentially this. that may be true but that statement is a strong statement of opinion. the redevelopment agency was controlled by members of the real estate industry whose real motivation was controlled by (inaudible) this may be an accurate statement, but there are areas of this document which i'm concerned that some of it may be conjectural or the sort of opinions of the authors rather than well-researched facts. just one concern be i had -- any other comments, commissioners? we're going to hear this again. >> make a motion when to continue. >> we need to make a motion of when to continue and i think we may want to give direction to the department, a little bit about what we're expecting to see in terms of the absorption of these comments . commissioner hyland. >> i wanted to thank the public for coming out. this document like others i've witnessed to me helps us build our community and it's really just a base line. for me as an architect and historic preservationist it's really not just about the buildings but it's about the memory and the meaning of the things that happen in those buildings and i think this is really a great point to start. it's really exciting to see the community come out and i would encourage the continuation of this dialogue but i wanted to point out that at some point we do have to put the pencils down and when we did the initial lgbt city-wide context statement 20 years ago it was a very quick and short document which then just got revised by shane watson and donna graves. so i think we're, we have a lot of information here and it would be great to make sure that at some point we can close the loop on this document and start building the resources around it that need to be recognized. >> thank you. mr. fry, in terms of timing. >> tim fry, department staff. we were looking at our schedules. we were thinking either in august or a september hearing date would give us enough time during the summer, hopefully, to either have maybe some informational workshops where mrepl bers of the community can provide us information and we can have more of a dialogue so those would be more like working meetings, and then we would then follow up with a community meeting to sort of unveil the final document to them before presenting it at a hearing. so if you are willing to entertain an august or a september date to give us that time this summer, i think that's reasonable given our schedules. >> commissioner matsuda. >> i just think as long as there's enough time to have not just one community meeting, at least several and have them at different places where you can get a wide community input would be great. >> sure. and we'll certainly --. >> and with enough time for them to actually sit down and review it. >> definitely. and we'll certainly take mr. williams up on his offer. i think it would be great to have a partner like mr. williams' organization. >> as well as mr. templeton, because his comments were quite extensive. critical. >> schedule in august? >> august 17th or september 7th. >> do you have a preference? >> august 17th? >> is that okay? >> after labor day. >> how about you? >> well it's hard during the summer. i think after labor day. >> do you have a preference for the august or september? >> if i may, i do think that that's going to be pretty tight to try to accomplish, given the summer, people are out of school, people are moving around traveling and the like. sometime in the fall, october-ish would probably be a better time frame if you're going to have several meetings in several locations these working groups and the like i think try to do it by august would completely would not work. >> so maybe we should think about the first hearing in october? >> october 5th. >> october 5th? >> yes. >> okay, do i have a motion to continue? >> so moved. >> second. >> october 5th. >> thank you, commissioners. then on that motion to continue this matter to october 5th, commissioner hasz, (calling roll) so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7-0 and places us on item 9 for 201500, the iepk he will side perez resbyterian by teeran church. >> the next item before you the great cloud of witnesses located at 1345 ocean avenue. the building was added to the work program in may 2013, at which time staff, sf heritage, probone flow architectural historian began working on the project. the building is recommended for landmark status for both its architectural and artistic contributions. first the church itself a architecturally significant as the church and community center embodies the distinctive characteristic of a type, period or method of construction as the work of a master with its tripartite construction capture the pedestrian diplt and supported by ionic columns and pilasters. inc. ingleside presbyterian church popular in the style following the chicago world's exposition. today the building is one of leonard's few extant religious structures in the city. secondly the church is artistickally significant for its mural, the great cloud of witnesses, begun by reverend gordon in 1960. the art work makes significant contribution to the study of folk art and african american history. to art historian the great cloud of witnesses is considered self-taught fork art. art of this type has been labeled many things throughout the last 100 years, including primitive, naive, outsider and vernacular. folk art is the art of every day, often rooted in community and cultural traditions and it expresses a cultural community. folk artists are often labeled as excentric outsiders when their work begins to take over the space around them. this is the definition of a folk artist environment. for your reference we did include n appendix to the report that provides you with examples of other folk artists' environments across the state and the country, some of which are listed on the national register. even among other folk artists environments reverend gordon's composition, size, location and the techniques he's used make it unique. the overall arrangement across multiple rooms and floors and the expansive size that encompasses most of his church's interior along with his church of media, predominately paper clips, found objects, plaques, flags and collage techniques is unparalleled on this scheme. the construction of legacy rooms and rooms dedicated to individual role models and the mix of contemporary pop culture icons combined with san francisco leaders and working class family members was initially intended to provide the use of his church with an all-inclusive range of role model. in retrospect it gives us 35 years and a comprehensive review of african american achievements and accomplishments in that time period. the great cloud of witnesses provides an illustrated history of the church itself and it's post 1906 earthquake beginnings, the community at large and it helps illustrate the people who shaped san francisco. the designation establishes two periods of significance to reflect the two associations. the first for 1923 when the church opened and for its original architecture by joseph leonard and the second for the recent past from 1980 to the present day which represents the start of reverend gordon's tenure with the church and the fact had us board of corrections is still a work in progress. including massing, elevation, roof lines, reverend gordon's additions to the exterior include lettering, crosses, bible verses, all of which are considered character-defining features. interior include the rooms, mill work, staircases and the spaces that were historically accessible to the public such as the lobby, the gym, the sanctuary, the mural collage is also considered character defining and it includes those spaces that reverend gordon has determined to be complete. so there is a list of completed rooms in your packet. some of those include the lobby, the gym, the obama technology center, the michael jackson center and the willy brown room. reverend gordon is allowed to keep working on other rooms that have not been determined complete in the same manner he's been working without any entitlement. it also states any future conservation or permitting efforts should consult the conditions assessment that was prepared by arg, which is attached as an appendix to the report. at this time there's no known public or neighborhood opposition to the designation of 1345 ocean avenue as an article 10 land mark. the property owner is the church, which is overseen by the church perez presbytery the department believes the landmark designation is warranted. the department recommends the hpc initiate sdig nais. if initiated today we'll come back to you with a second hearing to recommend article 10 designation to the board of supervisors. this concludes my presentation. dez ray smith with heritage and reverend gordon are here as well. >> before we do that i need a motion to recluse commissioner hyland because of his former association with arg >> i was not aware arg was involved with this project. (roll call) that motion passes unanimously 7-0. >> thank you. miss smith. >> hello, commissioner, i am desiree smith with san francisco heritage. we are excited to be here today, it's been a long work in progress and a true labor of love. this nomination has been in the works for at least a year now. we initially met reverend gordon back in 2013, we were invited by a colleague at the victorian alliance who was really excited to show us the space and our executive director and i went to visit and we were completely blown away. we've never experienced anything like this space, this artist environment. and it's personally my favorite building in the city. it's a real treasure and so we took on the project pro bono to do the research and i myself cowrote nomination, focusing more on the historical narrative. erica schultz who lives in the neighborhood, offered to, she's an architectural historian, she volunteerd to write the historical designation and we called on art to see if they would preserve a conservation assessment because the department that was really important if we were to landmark this building and reverend gordon will tell you more about firsthand his experience as the artist himself. so i want to leave most of my time for him but i just wanted to say how excited we are about this project, bury here to answer any questions and hand it over. >> thank you. reverend gordon. >> honorable commissioners, i'm honored to be here today, humbled. just as i was called to preach the gospel, i feel strongly as i look back on these 35 years to place the first portrait of one of my heroes, mohammed ali, on the wall. i'm a former athlete, high school basketball and college basketball athlete. i tell my young guys, star athlete, i worked hard. it was pretty decent but i noticed all the kids, ali, ali, i put another portrait up and they did the same thing. and i got the vision they might not read their black history books but they'll read the wall. i could not envision the work that had to be accomplished to do what has been done but i just got started and the next thing i knew the gymnasium was loaded with nothing but positive images. i've seen in my 35 -- actually over 40 years of work with young people, they need role models. they need to understand, they see images of especially their own culture achieving, they can get the image of themselves achieving. so that has been the value of the project over the years watching people come in and now willie brown, mayor brown's room, took him in maybe 5 years ago, said i'll be back in 5 minutes. he didn't come back. two hours later he came down, looked like he saw a ghost. since that time he sent people out from all across the nation and i've watched the response. it's all the same so i know it's something of major significance. i'm happy and humbled that i have been the one that i believe the higher power used to bring this beautiful and most important work into being and i'm just happy to be here today. thank you. >> thank you very much. that concludes the staff report. so, commission, i guess we'll take public comment first. does any member of the public wish to comment on this item? if so, please come forward. >> members of the commission, amos brown, pastor of third baptist. i rise to say, reverend dr. roland gordon embodies great creativity, quintessential artistry and is a great role model of commitment and achievement and i appeal to you to support the ingleside presbyterian church with this landmark status that he has requested. it's a model for the world to see how one man can take something out of his cultural context and even (inaudible). >> thank you. >> commissioners, al williams, president of san francisco african american historical and cultural society. i would like to on behalf of the society support the initiation of iepk ingleside presbyterian. i was wondering if we can designate reverend gordon as well. we had the privilege of working with reverend gordon in a var route of contexts and one of the, we found ourselves in a situation several years ago where we lost a space that we held as our archival space in a building we rent so we had to clear out a lot of materials. so we had boxes and boxes of old ebb knees and jetds and he said bring them to me. so we schlepped them out there and we feel connected to the institution as well through our sharing of the culture. we also had opportunity to participate in a program with heritage out there about the west side of san francisco and the african american presence on the west side last year that we did, so we fully support this designation and hope you will vote affirmatively on it. >> any other member of the public wish to went on this item? seeing and hearing none we will close public comment and bring it back to the commission. commissioner matsuda. >> i agree with desiree and maybe miss parks you can enhance the part of the murals in the african american historic context statement as well as reverend gordon. >> i think we can do that. there was a comment made that we had already included too much about reverend gordon, but i think it's worth it. >> thank you. commissioner pearlman. >> i just wanted to thank reverend gordon in particular but this is an amazingly cool thing. i think that every time we're here talking about a landmark designation we're talking about the story of our place and our time and it is so exciting to me, i mean i've board of correctionsed on worked on folk art projects through the community quilt and that was community members coming forward and bringing whatever skill and creativity they had to talk about the people they loved. this is the same kind of inspiration and it is a beautiful thing and i am so in support of this. reverend gordon, thank you so much for doing what you've done all your life. thank you. >> thank you, commissioner junk. >> i want to add my excitement to this proposal and i have to say when reverend gordon was speaking, like al williams, i said, we got the wrong building here, it's the man or the person, the human that is the embodiment of this. of course the building, yes, i certainly support the nomination of the proposed designation and i guess i was interested, it kept appearing on our agenda, continued and that kind of a thing. was it just a matter of getting all the reports right? >> a matter of getting the ordinance right, the designation ordinance. the report has been ready. >> okay, all right. >> the language for the ordinance. >> want to do this, yeah. i'm happy to offer a motion to support the presentation to initiate designation. >> i think we're happy to accept one. >> second. >> if there's nothing further, commissioners, there's a motion that has been seconded to adopt a resolution to initiate on that motion (calling roll) so moved, commissioners, that passes unanimously 6-0. that places us on 10a and b, 235 valencia street. this is your consideration of a motion to not confirm nomination and then a motion to amend findings of the inner commission north survey. >> may we have the overhead, please? good afternoon, commissioners, shannon ferguson, heartland staff. on april 6, 2016, the historic preservation commission adopted a motion of intent to not confirm nomination of 235 valencia street as an article 10 individual landmark but changed the california historic resources status code. the item was then continued to today's hearing. as previously noted 235 valencia street was documented in the inner mission north historic survey adopted on june 1, 2011. at that time the property was given a status of 6l, determined ineligible for local listing but may warrant special consideration in local planning. in december 2015 the department received a community-sponsored article for article 10 landmark designation for 235 valencia street. on april 6, 2016, the commission did not find 235 eligible for local listing. however, based on new information provided by the applicant and curb property owner found (inaudible) individual property based on the prompt's association with lauren hap jones. the department recommends approval of the motion to deny the department also recommends approval of the motion to amend 235 valencia's code. this concludes my presentation and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. we're taking this as two separate items. >> they are two separate items, commissioners. you can make a single motion to adopt both recommendations or take them separately if there is not consensus. >> i think we should take them up separately. so we will take the first item. first of all are there any questions for the presenter, miss ferguson before public comment? so on item 10a we will hear comment on the consideration of the motion about the landmark nomination. any member of the public wish to speak to this item, please come forward. seeing and hearing none, we will close public comment on this item, bring it back to the commission. >> i'd like to make a motion to recommend -- approve this non-recommendation. >> second. >> to not confirm. >> thank you, commissioners, on that motion then to not confirm nomination (calling roll) that motion passes unanimously, 7-0. >> so on the second item i will take public comment on that item. item 10b, consideration of the motion to amend the findings. any member of the public wish to speak to that item? >> (inaudible) so they can look at it. my name is larissa petrocelli, we have been happily meeting with the owner and having discussions with his design team from new york to find a path forward. it's been a little bit difficult because there's no precedents for us and we're really trying to figure out how we find a path forward that honors this building and honors it as a landmark because you may not think it meets landmark designation but it's a landmark to the community. and a week ago today we, our business is in the 2 fulton park building and it's 8.30 in the morning, we roll up our door, we're starting work, and there's two guys out there looking at the 235 building and they lack over at us, we say hello, and their thing is, you know, is the ghost of hap jones here? one of them is a san franciscoan who just dropped off his kid at high school and he's with his brother from new york and they're visiting the building and they're visiting the building because they spent a lot of time there, they bought their motorcycles there. it's not just the thing, maybe we didn't make it clear but it's not where people just bought gear and left. they hang out. it's a social scene. it's a community and so it may not meet landmark status but we're trying to find a way so that this facade can be preserved and that people can still visit it and it can have a sense of permanence. that's what's really important to people. we don't want be to stop progress and we certainly, we need housing and there are certain things that should move forward and it should be an active space, but we also don't want to just obliterate the history that's there and that means something to this community. and so if there are any suggestions that the commission has on how we can move forward, any support that could be provided that bee would really be open to that and i think actually the building owner would be open to that as well. we're both trying to navigate this together and figure out what we can do. so that's my only comment. thank you. >> thank you. any other member of the public wish to comment? >> hello again, commissioners. we actually expected the building owner to say something first but we have developed a friendly, cordial relationship with them. they spent time with us at the site, they invited us there. they have been working on some solutions, they have been working with us and they have taken the input, i think they've been learning along as we go through the process. it's been kind of a unique process where we're able to get involved, other community members can get involved and have a say. those guys, the owners are learning about it too. i think they're going to talk today about the possibility of encompassing more of the alley to go along with the building to honor hap jones. if that does happen we want to still keep the facade preservation issue on the radar and they have actually shown us some drawings that would actually reinforce that. a little bit of a compromise, they would take a little less of the front facade and work it into what looks like a nice building going forward. we have had some nice input from pro-development neighbors who feel preservation is a necessity in order to not destroy the historical context. the challenge here is we know they want to work hard to bring a good building to the market and to the community so we wonder if maybe there's a way to agree together to keep all these interests moving forward but not actually change or delay or, you know, tie up too much of this in the time frame. so we talked to them about an mou, the memorandum of understanding how to uphold a project that would actually benefit everybody and be do some great things for the community. so i look forward to hear what they have to say and thanks for your time. >> thank you. any other member of the public wish to comment? >> waiting on sfgov to pick up the overhead. >> you want me to wait? >> yes, just wait a second. there we go. >> good afternoon, thank you for the continued opportunity to respond to the 235 valencia street landmark application. my name is craig ham burg with ddt and we're the property owners. i'm here today to support your action for rejecting the landmark proposal for this building and also want to ask you to put off any consideration for amending this survey as it applies to this building while we continue to work with the neighbors and staff to find appropriate ways to honor hap jones. as you know, ddg is at the beginning of the entitlement process for this project. the current rating for the building with allow demolition or significant alteration without triggering a costly and timely eir however, if the building rating is changed as indicated in the draft motion before you it will automatically mean that our project will require an eir given that we and the neighbors have already done a significant amount of research on hap, we ask what is the purpose of requiring the eir for this project? it will easily add a year or more to the government body. following our previous hearing with our architect developed a theme of living alley which can include a motorcycle statue plaque, public seating, bike parking as well as motorcycle themed manhole colors and grates. we envision a motorcycle focused version of hayes valley lindon street. we shared our concept with the neighbors as they noted and i think they are generally supportive. i've brought for you today some images. as you can see in the upper right-hand corner there's a motorcycle statue that we've kind of found for precedence --. >> i'm going to extend your time for two minutes. >> thank you, i'm almost done. i've also included some plaques such as the hill brothers and the barbery coast sidewalk manhole covers as well and lyndon street is to the bottom left and a hap jones themed lobby, which is more internal and less public, is included on the upper left. additional opportunities via the architecture and retail uses and previously mentioned lobby will also be explored with the community involvement. however, i feel though living alley is more permanent and public and it's a gesture that can be enjoyed by all and is really suited for hap's legacy. andrew junius, our attorney, is here with us today and he can answer any questions. >> thank you, mr. junius, want to come forward? >> commissioners, andrew junius with ruben, junius and rose. i really want to emphasize and the only reason i'm here today is to make a clear to the commission where this decision you could make today or possibly in the future would leave this project from a ceqa standpoint. it's really as clear and straightforward as craig mentioned. if this building becomes a registered historic resource, even a low level resource, ceqa demands we do an environmental report if that resource goes away, if it's demolished. ceqa has 3 bins you can fit a project into. the best bin for developers is obviously an exemption and this project would probably get a exemption. it can be a code-complying eastern neighborhood plan and a lot of those these days get seek ceqa exemptions. it doesn't rise to the next step of a negative declaration, probably not appropriate here, but if the building goes allah we must by law do a report. it will easily add a year to this entitlement process and just confirming what craig has already said, for what purpose? a ton of information is up there, we already know a lot, all that information is going to go into the ceqa document, the exemption document. do we really need another year of process? an eir is a big project and the only reason it would go to eir is if you decide this building is historic enough to warrant that. given what you've heard today from both the neighbors and the building owner, i think there's a great opportunity to continue your involvement to allow us to come back in 2 or 3 months, let us show you a design for a living alley, let us show you how cool the plaque can be, get the neighborhood what it wants, get the commission and the community what they want and not burden the project here with an exercise that just isn't necessary, we don't believe. we hope you will consider a continuance for two or three months, give us some time to work on this and thank you for your time. >> nr. fry. >> commissioners, to follow up on mr. junius comments but just to give us a little bit of background, from a ceqa perspective we are really looking at what the base line information indicates to us on whether or not something appears to be a historic resource or not, meaning eligible for the california register. while the documentation was helpful in us determining we don't believe the building is eligible for local landmark listing, there was enough new information there that warranted us to bring that before you and say there may be more information here to change that status code, which is why you see the status code says, you know, the subject building appears to be eligible. we still do not know definitively because the base lane for ceqa is very different than just listing something on the california register. so you can certainly make findings to uphold the current status code as it not being a historic resource for the purposes of ceqa, but we just wanted to clarify, we commend the owner working with the residents and the community to develop a project that people feel positive about, but looking at it purely with our ceqa blinders on, really all our determination is supposed to take into account is whether or not the information presented to us changes our determination on the building, whether it's a resource or not. and because of that we were leaning towards it being a resource. so it's just something to keep in mind during your deliberation. >> thank you. we didn't close public comment. does any other member of the public wish to speak on this item? seeing and hearing none we will close public comment and bring it back to the commission. commissioner pearlman. >> this is sort of interesting to me because, you know, we talked about this after the hearing last time and i certainly, because i work on projects similar to this in the city, understand the notion that what's probably a two-year process would be extended by at least a year by our action here or more and that there is no, like, middle path. there is no way to kind of go down the side alley and figure out a way for projects like this that seem so necessary in our city and of course everyone in the development community talks about oh, my god, it takes so long to get anything done and you miss cycles, you miss economic cycles because things take so long. so i am interested in mr. fry what you just said about, you know, appears to be eligible and in the motion about denying the nomination, finding no. 2 says however jones direct association with the property during under the circumstances productive life has not been established as one of the reasons not to make it a landmark. and, you know, as both sides of this argument have said, we probably have as much information as is possible about hap jones, about whether he in and of himself is important or if he's important in relationship to this building. so it seems it me that we're creating a massive problem for something that will end up in the same place, you know, that if we change the status code and say yes it's a historic resource because there is no other avenue, as mr. junius has pointed out that we then have to do this eir, to end up in a place where we have the information and we, you know, and we've already stated that there isn't a linkage and then on the other hand we come to the preservation, the motion for changing the status code and it says whereas the subject building appears to be eligible to change the code to rcf as an individual property through survey evaluation based on the property's early association with important motorcycle figure lauren hap jones. there's a conflict there. it either is associated and is established, which we said it wasn't in our last motion, or it is established that it is. so to me there's a confusion that isn't clear. i appreciate very much, i mean here's a community group that's working side by side with a developer and they feel like there is a path through and the thing that i've talked about all the time is that we never seem to get the history out to the public even when we go through these long processes and once in a while, yeah, there's a plaque and there's something that shows up at the end. this is an amazing opportunity, i think, that they probably wouldn't put out if we do what we're going to do, you know, if we change the status code i would imagine the developer wouldn't be quite as happen to develop this whole alley and do all this if they are subject to so much more study and scrutiny to end up in the same exact place they would be if it were not --. >> commissioners, if i could just take a moment in your deliberations to clarify, i think commissioner pearlman brought up an interesting point about the two motions. but while they seem conflicting, they are correct because that base line for ceqa is such a different threshold than local landmark designation. so, you know, we can say clearly for local designation the association is not, hasn't been made. but if there's enough information to at least allude to that association with hap jones, that's enough for the purposes of ceqa to say we may have a historic resource here. so another way of looking at it --. >> but where do you go from there? it appears to be eligible based on information we already said cannot be established. >> that's what president hyland said, studying the eir there may be more information to collect that may help flesh out that whole story. the flip side of this, because i guess i'm just afraid some decision would be made based on the merits of the project or the community working well with the developer. if this building were to sell tomorrow and we had a new owner that said i'm not going anything, i'm going to just demolish and do anything i want, we would have no memorialization of hap jones. just to keep it in mind, i think it's great we're going down that pat, but that's why we have ceqa. ceqa is to provide this mitigation and these interpretive displays or whatever to try to enforce that as part of environmental law. >> quick question. if we continue the item but don't do anything about it, then there's still some pending decision we would make. the second decision is more about if we uphold the 6l, does that put this matter to rest regarding the department and their ceqa determination? >> it would mean the building would not be a real estate source for purposes of ceqa. >> commissioner junk. >> i just want to review the facts and review my thinking on it. i call this historic resource designation as opposed to non-landmark as a solution to coming up with a preservation solution for the property. and that would come before us that wae could review. it was a method. now the facts, i mean, if we approve the designation here as mr. junius said it's 100 percent sure we bof to go through an eir >> it's the officer's determination but usually the demolition of an eligible property would call for at least an eir for impact purposes. >> i didn't necessarily want to go there to the full eir, i mean i agree with the comment with the owner. however, i still want to see preservation solution. i think we're the historic preservation commission, the community has done a great job in bringing a lot of information for us. i don't want to, i think that's something we need to support and not ignore. i think that while the characteristics, the features, the history, the architecture, all of them have merit for some kind of consideration for preservation solution i would like to see that, you know, we're beyond just historic building, we're into cultural heritage assets as well. i want to tell the public that we are interested in moving in that kind of a direction so i guess i'm a little bit stuck, am i still stuck again? i don't want to have -- or what other solutions do we have? i don't think a full eir is needed. >> the only mechanism in the process that would bring the future project back to the commission is the review and comment phase of the eir if you disagree and feel that you uphold the current status code, the project would essentially move through our planning process and it would not come back to this commission. >> okay, the city attorney just reminded me that we need to focus on the motion before us, which is this change in the status code more than other things related to the project. so commissioner hasz. >> thank you. i have to reposition my comment after the city attorney project. >> it's not about a future project. >> leading with this, we're talking about a person, potentially events. we're not talking about architecture which, in the end, may only be a plaque anyway and we're talking about a developer who's talking about an alleyway full of memorialization potentially. the other thing i want to talk about, this alleyway, is that this building is going to sit vacant for a couple years. if you count all the street frontage it takes almost a whole city block. it's a beautiful spot for encampment, i personally feel badly for the neighborhood for having to deal with that for two years just in the normal planning process. i would like to see a project move as fast as possible to try to keep that block as safe, neat and clean as posz -- possible for the neighborhood. so i look at it a little bit differently than that. i personally, again, am just going to reiterate it was a person, not the architectural value. period of time. i would not be in support of changing the status code. >> commissioner hyland. >> most vocal the last hearing and i agree with commissioner hasz it is about the history and hap jones and not necessarily the architecture, somewhat of an unremarkable building. commissioner pearlman, you asked if there was a middle path and i think giving the property owner and the community an opportunity to come to an mou could be a middle path, just for our consideration here that would at least give the developer and property owner further upb 17 tif and recognize the effort that the community has put into bringing something that they feel is culturally significant to their community, tais -- it's not my community. i'm asking us to be a little more open-minded as far as what community means to us individually. in the eir we will have to go through other aspects of the eir, so it wouldn't necessarily be a time constraint, it would just have to be an added cost. there would have to be a focused section of --. >> we're getting off the topic again. >> i don't know that this, i think there's traffic, there's other things that need to be studied and that's going to take a process that this would be a parallel process on. i would propose, i'll make the motion -- you want to speak? >> commissioner johns and then we'll take a motion. >> thank you. i thought a lot about the suggestion of continuing this to allow the parties to work out some kind of a deal and that has lot of appeal to it. except what bothers me about that is i think that's totally beside the point when it comes to what we need to decide. that is a distraction and i take it that that's what the city attorney was suggesting that we be leery of doing. so i am, this was one of those close things but i think that commissioner hasz has put the case very nicely and very persuasively and i would not be in favor of changing the status. >> i would say that the city attorney was concerned about our discussion of this. i think we could continue it if we wanted to, it has nothing to do with the reason for the continuance, we can just decide we are going to continue the item. >> yes, victoria long, the matter of whether or not you continue might be for any number of reasons. >> we could decide to continue because i don't feel like talking about it any more (laughter) i understand that we could do that, but my point wasn't to say that we couldn't continue it. my point was to say i think we are just avoiding the problem, avoiding making the decision which is up to us to make. because the neighbors and the land owner can make any kind of a deal they want but that doesn't address what, as i understand it, we're supposed to decide. that's why i think that commissioner hasz has pointed the way. >> commissioner hyland. >> i would just like to, i don't know, remind, i don't want to be talking down to the commission, but there have been many landmarks before this commission that have been very unremarkable buildings that have been landmarked because of the history. and at this point in time we're making a determination that this hild industry for this building isn't as significant as what has been done for past buildings. marcus books is an example, very unremarkable building that now has prodex -- protx eye ue protection because of the meaning and the memory of what happened there. i would like to continue it. >> commissioner hasz. >> it just seems to me like we should follow what the owner, commissioner pearlman is middle ground. historically significant category, not landmarking category. that's a whole another discussion but it would seem we should be able to come up with something that would get us in the books. that's all you have with marcus books. marcus books, it me there's a lot more cultural significance in that one than here. i don't want to put those two in the same conversation. we have refused other buildings to go to landmarking very recently so i will lead with a motion to deny status code change. >> second. >> wait, i did have a motion. >> you didn't say. >> i did. motion to continue. >> i didn't hear the first -- so if you want to go with that motion on the floor, is that what we're doing? >> there was a motion to continue. >> but then you stopped. >> because commission johns had a comment. >> was there a stoekd that motion? >> i second that, to continue. >> so there is a couple things here. okay, the motion to continue --. >> i withdraw my motion and let the other motion go forward. >> and furthermore i believe the only motion before you is to approve the change so it would have to be a motion of intent, anyway, and a continuance to get something before you that would not change the status, nor the historical status. having said that, the motion to continue supersedes that. >> wouldn't the motion to continue just be to continue the item with no decision at all? >> there's nothing. my understanding, it's just to continue to further evaluate. >> right, is that what you --. >> that's correct. and bee already determined it was not going to be a landmark. that was an approved motion but i think it will just take time. >> we have a motion, what date, two months? three months? >> commissioner junk. >> a date, and i would say as soon as possible. >> sounded like we wanted to have a little bit more time. >> does the maker of the motion have a sense of --. >> they were talking about 3 months. >> three months, commissioner hyland? the maker of the motion suggests 3 months. >> that would put us on july 6. >> that's two months. >> august 3rd. >> that amenable to both the motion maker and the second? >> yes. >> there is a motion that has been seconded to continue item 10b to august 3. (calling roll) so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 4 to 3 with commissioners hasz, johns and pearlman voting against. that will place us on item 11, 140 maiden lane, initiate amendment of the landmark designation. >> good afternoons, commissioners, sandra ferguson, planning department staff. i am here to present (inaudible) historically known as the b. c. morris gift shop located in the kearney market conservation district. 140 maiden lane was designated as landmark 72 in 1975. at that time only the exterior features of the building were designated. the designation would be amended to include the interior features as well as the exterior features. the original building was constructed in 1911. shop owners b. c. morris and wife lillian asked frank lloyd wright to complete an exterior. on the exterior the big blank wall of roman brick breaks the rules of department storefronts. it was the first time wright used this design motif in decades. wright deliberately masked and concealed the sbaer 84 circular structure completed well before the gugenheim museum. the bc morris shop became one of wright's favorite buildings and he often included it in his publications and exhibitions of his work. frank lloyd wright is by far the most well-known and influential american architect. his work influenced the development of modern architectural and in europe. although wright produced several designs for other buildings in san francisco, the b. c. morris is the only one that was realized. it is a rare modern building designed by a modern extant architect. we have received one letter of support from a community member. supervisor peskin is also in support of amendment to the landmark designation to include the interior. the department believes the building meets the established eligibility requirements and amendment is warranted. if initiated today, the department will return at a subsequent commission hearing and a resolution recommending amendment of the landmark designation to the board of supervisors. this concludes my present -- presentation, i'm happy to answer any questions. >> commissioner pearlman? >> no. >> we will take public comment at this time, i have two speaker times, lee heffner. >> thank you, commissioners, lee heffner from supervisor peskin's office, nice to be before you a second time today. the supervisor does heartily support this project, the building resides in district 3. i think it's a unique opportunity for us to preserve and protect a structure designed by frank lloyd wright, unquestionably the most famous architect of the 20th century. i want to thank the planning department's planning staff, kim fry and dr. paul turner and phillip allison who reached out to us early in the project out of love for the interior. structure. really, if you take a look at the outside, relatively nondid he script and it is the interior of the building that is truly so spectacular. i encourage you to initiate the amendment of the interior of the structure and thank you so much. >> paul turner. >> thank you. yes, my name is paul turner and i'm an architectural historian and i'm going to read my remarks to make sure that i keep within the time limit. this building on maiden lane originally the vc morris shop selling 9 dhiepb that and glassware is one of frank lloyd right's most important works and it was one of his personal favorites. whenever he came to san francisco he would go there toe see it and included it in publications of his structures. with its sky lit structure and wood furnishings all designed by wright himself. morover, this interior is especially significant because of its connection with the guggenheim museum in new york. he began designing the museum in 1943 but he accept revising the design and construction put off and it wasn't actually built until the late 50's. in the meantime, in 1948 wright was hired by lillian and bbc morris to remodel their shop. wright did not normally take on remodeling job but he did in this case because he saw an opportunity to explore the main feature of the guggenheim, a spiral staircase used for the display of objects. the shop was built in 1949 and was immediately recognized as one of wright's most xizity works. later after the death of the morris' the shop was used for the sale of other types of merchandise and some changes were made to it. then in 1997 the building was bought by raymond handly who undertook a thorough restoration of it and it became the shop xanadu and remained in beautiful condition until its recent sale. not long before his death wright mentioned to lillian morris his concern about what would happen to this building when they were all gone and she wrote back to him, saying, have no apprehension, the building will be kept in its entirety and integrity whether continuing as a shop or as a museum for which it is known. by then it had already become a pilgrimage site for lovers of architecture from around the world, as it still is. more than any other comparable american building i can think of, this san francisco treasure, including its interior, should be kept in its entirety and integrity as lillian morris said to frank lloyd wright. >> any other member of the public wish to speak to this number? seeing and hearing none we will close public comment. commissioner pearlman. >> i just want to point out a great irony and this is the story of our history in san francisco. i wrote a short story many, many years ago about frank lloyd wright with the drawings for the b. c. morris store going into the counter so he can review his design with counter staff today and the issue of course is that it's in a conservation district and there's not one item of that b. c. morris store that relates to any character-defining feature of that district and most likely today that store would not be allowed to be built without significant design because of the way we view preservation today. so to me it is a huge irony that we consider this to be like one of these amazing great buildings of san francisco an i've been in the building many times, one of the great interiors in the city. probably one of the best. i heartily endorse this but i think it's an interesting twist of fate that a building like this ends up in the middle of a conservation district of which there's nothing that -- that it relates to nothing in this particular district. but again it's the story of san francisco, the story of how cities get made and change and grow that wie still consider something know an artistic piece. it doesn't matter where it is, it's still an amazing artistic piece. >> thank you. other comments? >> i would like to move the staff recommendation. it's wonderful. >> second. >> excellent. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further then there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt a resolution to initiate. on that motion (calling roll) that motion passes unanimously 7-0. >> thank you for all your hard work on this and thank you to the members of the public for coming today and that adjourns our hearing. (meeting adjourned). welcome t on department of aging & adult services please take roll. >>

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Ingleside Presbyterian Church , California , Japan , Alleghany , Valencia , Carabobo , Venezuela , Germantown , Bayview , Oregon , Mississippi , San Francisco , Fulton Park , Fairmont , Eureka Valley , North Beach , France , Spain , Chicago , Illinois , Ingleside , Americans , America , Spanish , French , American , Hall Robison , Swilly Brown , John Galen Howard , Douglas Plaza , Vince Morris , Phillip Allison , Frank Lloyd Wright , John Mercer Langston , L Doris Cameron , Fannie Preston , Elizabeth L Parker , Roland Gordon , Larissa Petrocelli , Peter Burnett , Andrew Junius , Desiree Smith , Mohammed Ali , John Templeton , Amos Brown , Sandra Ferguson , Langston Hughes , Paul Turner , Etta James , Mary Mccann Stewart , Lee Heffner , Frank Lloyd , Al Williams , Mary Brown , David Campo , Martin Luther King , Francis Drake , Doris Cameron , Joseph Leonard , Dorothy Mitchell , Lillian Morris , Tim Kelly , Erica Schultz , John Reed , Archie Reynolds , Carl Williams , Shannon Ferguson , Willie Brown , Shane Watson , Ray Smith , Hillary Ronin , Frederick Douglas Plaza , Frankie Gillette ,