homeowners as well, but developers often try to make additions on to the buildings to offset the carrying costs while under construction. it takes about six to eight months to get a permit for a residential real model in san francisco. that means developers are getting to where they just don't want to do it anymore. if that happens, it means that developers are the only ones that will go into these buildings and get them to the degree that we can fully seismic retrofit them and make them energy-efficient and firebreak them, which benefits the entire city. i don't have any problem with preservation planning. i have restored these buildings and that my problem is it takes so long to get the permits. [tone] i wish there was a way to speed up the process of the permitting. supervisor wiener: thank you

very much. >> i come today to ask a few questions specifically around the parks themselves. our biggest point is at as our city grows, demographics are going to change it will see a huge influx in the diversity of new reds. we need to preserve our ability to change passive to active recreation as needed by the communities. we need to look at the cost with historical landmarking of parks. we have a lot of neighborhood store to put a lot of sweat equity into renovating and up keeping their lands. we want to make sure it is not cost prohibitive and the costs are not passed on to community members. lastly, our parks are outdated. we must balance our need to be ecologically conservative with our ability to preserve our open

spaces. supervisor wiener: thank you very much. next speaker. >> i'm a homeowner and to my understanding, we could be slated to be the next designated historic neighborhood. my concern is i believe homeowners are already inundated with some new rules and regulations we have to all the apparatus from doing necessary remodeling to our homes that it becomes almost impossible bind and chile and politically to get through the process. i'm wondering what it for the homeowner to be designated a historic neighborhood other than that we have to go through a stricter review process when we want to remodeler homes. is the city willing to take over the printing of our trees and repairing of the sidewalks to

make up for the cost for meeting the requirements? will there be a tax reduction for homeowners? i hear nothing for the homeowner. [tone] just more power to the county and the city. >>supervisor wiener: one of the challenges in the survey area is making sure everyone is engaged and knows what is going on. we're looking at more effective ways to do that. >> my comments are a cautionary tale regarding the southern pacific hospital in san francisco. we joint venture with mercy housing everybody was on the same page. but the problem in these deals is they involve bonds, section 8, historic tax credits and low- income housing tax credits.

there is an ally is the rub. low-income tax credits have a drop dead to year in service date. if you do not meet the date, you lose everything. the process needs to be demystified and clear. uncertainty is the enemy of the developer. the defined protocol needs to put in place and you also have to get out and identify what is historically significant and what is not. [tone] supervisor wiener: thank you very much. next speaker. >> i came today to put my support behind the historic preservation committee. i was very happy when the city voted. i think they do a fantastic job

of reviewing particular cases. because of their backgrounds, they have to have particular backgrounds and architectural history which did not necessarily happen before this committee evolved. but i was interested listening to the department's today and some of the issues that came up. what the gentleman just said before me talked about the importance of information for affordable housing, the surveys are very important. if the surveys are done, we understand where their resources are. it doesn't mean they're all going to be historic districts just because a survey is done but it is important to identify them. [tone] supervisor wiener: thank you. >> i'm a homeowner in dog patch. i hear this resounding fear of what is going to happen if we

become a historic district. the survey is very important to do. it lays out what is historic and what is not. it does not create a historic district. if you look at the boundaries of what our survey was for dog patch compared to what the actual area is, it is like checkerboards. there are so many things that are not historic. i really appreciate the fact that you do have the ability to preserve but also build. a historic brick and timber building, the real use of a warehouse that was turned into housing and achieved completely from the start to finish -- [tone] supervisor wiener: thank you very much. >> i am here today as my

capacity of the east share citizens advisory committee. we are 19 members appointed by the mayor and board of supervisors and our charter is to be the keeper of the eastern neighborhood plan and provide guidance on things like this. we have been undertaking legislatively mandated surveys of the neighborhood and we remain concerned we do not see a process that balances the results of those surveys being performed with other priorities of the plan which include housing, transportation, balancing jobs, having a policy line item -- that does not mean balance. we see potential districting coming out of those surveys. we feel they are overused and we have examples of surveyed areas that are small portions of the south mission with 13 potential

districts being proposed. [tone] supervisor wiener: thank you very much. >> i have a tale of two owners. early 1980's, it was the worst of times. a group of investors bought two lots intending to build high- rise. after they spent time, money and energy on the process -- of the projects, they discovered there was an old historic building on of the lot. the development failed and if they had known, they would have known it was an appropriate investment for them. fast forward to the late 90's, it was the best of times. article 11 had passed and the historic building was designated. i bought the building knowing it was historic, so i knew i could take advantage of the historical building code to save the integrity. i did not have to get the building to do my seismic

upgrade and i knew i could sell by transferable development rights to pay for the project and could get tax credits to pay for the project and [tone] i successfully rehabilitated buildings. supervisor wiener: was thank you. >> i'm a student and i had quick question -- i was wondering how we could preserve historic landmarks like the many stations while considering sustainability and striving for more efficient means of public transit. supervisor wiener: next speaker. actually -- before you start, let me call some more names. [reading names]

>> thank you. i value the legacy of the past, the artisans, the architect visions they have for society. thank you for having this hearing so it can remind elected officials and the city's, the department said service, the public that our history is worth preserving. when history is no longer taught

as a freshman course at the high-school, we are put on notice that respecting the past is becoming optional. this is not exceptional -- this is not acceptable. this kind of thinking does not benefit our city or ourselves. historical preservation of historic reactor representations' of the past need merit to have the extra measure of caution so that we can hang on to things. let us not expedite the loss of history. thank you. >> i'm speaking for the baby opera house. -- the bayview opera house. but believe we are the most recent landmark announced.

i want to tell you how being a landmark has helped us secure funding to actually improve the facility so tremendously that everybody says what does a look like now. it is a respectable building were the of the historic designation it has had for some time. furthermore, we were able to get a grant to replace the building on the national register and the reaction to that actually happening in the community has been overwhelming. it has become a source of community pride and it can be the center is has been trying to be for a long time. i want to piggyback on something supervisor: raised at the beginning. [tone]

the bay view has very few -- there is a lot of city money going into that which needs to be distributed throughout the city. thank you. supervisor wiener: next speaker. >> good afternoon. history is a memory of nations. in 1948, after a war between the united states and mexico, -- in 1848, but after the war between mexico and the united states, the treaty of guadalupe hidalgo was signed. shortly afterward, news of gold

discovered spread all over the world. by that time, [unintelligible] in 1850, a young priest are arrived in california. [tone] i was given less than a minute. [unintelligible] supervisor wiener: thank you. >> because this was built by

human beings. supervisor wiener: thank you. next speaker. >> i want to do think the supervisor winner for having the courage to bring up this discussion of historical preservation for anyone going to the process, i can tell you going through the historical preservation process is probably as painful as a proposed new circumcision law that has been on the ballot in november. it is incredibly complex. let me just put it into perspective. under the current guidelines, we would not be able to approved the conversion of the ferry billy -- the ferry building. we would have created to centers for homeless encampments, but we proved as. now we have a great example of urban renewal and growth.

let us not be caught up in this hall perception. most of the people against construction and growth -- [tone] simply to derail projects. supervisor wiener: thank you. >> i'm the president of [unintelligible] rather than having a discussion about current needs, it feels like at that -- feels like an attack on historic preservation itself. any so-called negative effects have been way overblown. if it were not for the protections that exist, one can only imagine what this city would look like. historic preservation does not impede affordable housing, but lack of imagination do.

we continue to see development designed for the rich. buildings that fit nicely get remodeled into large sums for the wealthy rather than marred -- rather than modestly improved for the middle-class. i know this from experience. i had a victorian fixer-uppers' next three that became a demolition even though it was a remodel. every single piece of the front wall was removed. [tone] if there are real problems that need to be addressed, let's look at the issues, but historic preservation must be strong or the greater good will suffer. >> thank you. >> i am a of land-use attorney and want to talk about the intersection of survey work and a sequel. currently, they are looking at whether a building identified a may survey effects the district

and is therefore an impact. that has not been my experience in the past. what has been the experience is any time a building is identified in a survey, it is automatically considered an impact if there is a demolition or alteration of the building, regardless of whether it was identified. once it is identified, you have a very serious problem. i think the anxiety can be resolved if the planning department would develop the means of looking at impacts on districts as a whole when a small individual building is supposed to be demolished or altered. that would solve a lot of the problem you are hearing tonight. supervisor wiener: thank you. >> i'm the deputy director of the planning association.

we've been very involved with topics of historic preservation of the past few years, including revisions to the planning code. we recently initiated a joint task force focused on the topic of historic districts. this task force is attempting to grapple with forney and difficult questions. the goal is twofold -- to protect the unique cultural heritage, while allowing it to grow that reflect -- growth in ways that reflect its other bodies like sustainability. we believe it is possible to preserve the buildings which are most important while allowing for growth and change. one very important example is the downtown plan which preserved many buildings, allowing for the downtown to be a major transit oriented -- [tone]

supervisor wiener: thank you. >> the supervisor seems to have already made up his mind. it seems change -- seems strange to have a hearing balancing it with public policy goals. is an historic preservation a public policy goal? it seems the city barely has a historic preservation plan. where is the conflict between public policy goals and historic preservation? a project stopped because of concerns about windows? projects abandoned because of a of a refusal to do and eir? i see the widespread disregard of architecture with little girl -- they simply do not have the will or the staffing. let's get a grip and help preserve these things that make our city unique and give us an

authentic sense of place and memory. thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i have to object to this process. one minute? that's a joke. the fact that the historic preservation commission was given such a short amount of time is insulting. i'm speaking as a member of the japan town neighborhood committee. i am concerned this process will have a negative impact on the future of japan town. many folks are too young to remember what happened to japan town. you may not know or have forgotten we were in turned

during 1942. secondly, the redevelopment of historic japan town and the african-american communities -- i believe this so-called balancing will result in the weakening of historic preservation in san francisco. [tone] if it ain't broke, don't fix it. supervisor wiener: thank you. next speaker. >> i'm a land-use attorney. i want to speak to a large subset of buildings with no historic designation, are not within the historic designation but because there 50 years old or older are subject to height and historic review. even if there is categorical exemption, they can be caught up with historical boards that can cause -- can cost tens of thousands of dollars. these are four buildings subject

to [unintelligible] there was a study done by the planning department that shows the review process is more lanky and burdensome than required and the department spends three or four times longer getting categorical exemptions issued another local governments in the state. i want to suggest we give planners more discretion to limit the historical view. [tone] supervisor wiener: thank you very much. >> i support historic preservation, but preservation of communities, not just buildings. as a civil-rights attorney who spent three years litigating fair housing claims against real-estate speculators in pasadena, calif., using historical precedents to get african-americans out of their homes, using things like color

of paint, i say we should set the highest possible threshold for the creation of these new historic districts. certainly the proposition j intended new rules for the districts and this means increased safeguards. the city of pusan recently adopted new requirements while adhering to a now means note demolition policy. let's look at an opt out provision. we must not drive out low- income, fixed income families or tradesman and tradeswoman with record unemployment. [tone] supervisor wiener: thank you. >> i would like to say i went before the city planning commission and i was opposed to the fact that in my area, list of the homes there are 50 years

old or older. i want you to understand this very carefully. a survey was done about a month and a half ago. only three residents showed up. in my community, we have a lot of asians, latinos and some owens. nothing in their language was put around their doors. they were not there. if you look at this audience today, you do not see -- the thing of it is, i had my house painted and i had solar put on my home. i don't like the fact someone can tell me what i can and cannot do to my property and if you can't afford it, most of us are low income anyway. thank you very much. [tone] supervisor wiener: 01 to ask a question about the precise

issue. i know there was a meeting that was completed and as i understand it, the attendance at the meeting was very for. given that surveys which could eventually lead to districts, people should be aware of that and there are consequences, some of them very good, some creating additional costs for people, i don't want to make assumptions about all of these meetings, but in my experience they have not always been well attended. what can we do to make sure people know exactly what is happening and what the consequences are for their properties? >> notices for the survey were sent to every property owner in the district. we also provide those for three separate languages. we had it translators at the

hearings and that the presentation for non-english speaking persons. we also posted flyers throughout the community to let anyone interested know about the community meetings. all i can say is it might be because of a high number of renters is why we had a low turnout for those community meetings. the planning department is initiating a review of all of its community correspondence this summer to identify better ways of how we can do outreach and we hope we can implement those in the future. hufsupervisor wiener: are those multilevel notices sent out in the bayview? is that a common practice?

>> yes, they are, but the survey in the days till -- in the bay view area, we only had limited participation in that survey, so they're noticing procedure may be slightly different. >> i understand the point about the high percentage of tenants, that they may not be as motivated as a property owner to attend, but the fact that you still have low attendance even among property owners says to me there is something not happening -- i don't know what the answer is. i know it is difficult to motivate people to come to meetings, but the tenants should be interested because if you have a piece of property that could be surveyed, that could create additional costs or time. he may have a property owner who is less likely to do that.

i just want to stress how important is to do something to get more people engaged in these surveys. thank you. back to public comment. >> just to follow on the discussion about the low attendance at some of these informational hearings. it may be because a lot of people did not understand the significance of what it means a property owner and how can affect them in the future. nothing what actually advise them of this. i hate to be harsh, but the information on the planning department website is a little rosy compared to the experience p