-- defer to the experts. some of the natural aspects do not date back to the period of significance. it is difficult for me to speculate what those elements would be. the ocean to my colleagues have any questions? we're going to move into public comment. the number of comment cards has have decreased significantly. public comment will be limited to what it. i will be flexible. if you are in the middle of the thought, will be flexible about that. the number of cards and has significantly increased from when the hearing began. so i am going to call out a

number of names. if you could line up going down the middle, i apologize of advance the names of going to butchered. i am sure there will be quite a few we will start with commissioner. >[reading names]

>> thank you, supervisors. it is a pleasure to be speaking with you today. i am currently the president of the historic preservation commission. you have a letter in your packet that i will not read because of the limitation of time have imposed on us. i would like to speak to a couple of the issues that are most important to your discussion today. which i believe centers around the issue of the role of the historic preservation commission. i think you have heard testimony that the historic preservation commission since its inception has worked diligently to work with the community. i have heard as you have heard of issues that may have been issues for particular departments or agencies of the city, i think you should be

aware that those issues brought before the historic preservation commission for ones that were concerns to the community. he did not go out and seek fees as issues that need to be addressed. there also provided as informational hearings to us. let me just say that of the projects and the items that we have heard over the last couple of years, we have indicated a 99% approval rate. it says that we speak very clearly and very concisely about balancing the issues associated with the work that our commission does. let me just say that we believe that historic preservation has a very important place. the notion that historic resources survey in historic

designations provide not only the incentive of recognition and economic benefit to this community -- >> commissioner -- >> i would just say that it is incredibly important that it be taken up in your discussion. >> good afternoon, supervisors. among the historic preservation commission, but i am speaking for myself. as a result of of almost a decade's long planning effort, the big areas, they resulted in the east plan, the mission plan, and the market octavia plan that was adopted by the board of supervisors, they could

balance between development and historic preservation. and specifically, a policy of the summit plan says that it is to pursue formal designation of the east summit historic and cultural resource as appropriate. 8.2 of the adopted missionary plan to pursue formal designation of the historic cultural resources as appropriate, policy 3.2 0.10 of the adopt the octavia plan calls for support of the future preservation efforts included the designation of historic landmarks throughout the plan. these policies were adopted by the board of supervisors after many years of planning. i asked you to uphold these plans and the balance that is already in them.

>> have a member of the city hall preservation advisory commission where i hold the building preservation seats. it came into its own in the 1960's. it was formed by issues of the time. there was a lot of discussion in the preservation community. to look at things, you will find discussions in the journal for preservation. people write books and so forth. i am concerned about the tension between sustainability in historic preservation. the planning director has been talking about holding its reservations of that for the last nine months earlier and has been unable to get any support to do that. having a day or longer session where we get people from out of san francisco and really get into the issues would be a very

healthy thing. i commend the supervisor and his colleagues for bringing this issue out of the shadows and hopefully it will remain that way for some time. >> think you. at a time when the library is having to cut back services and a lot of other programs, it will give them more power. has anybody even added up the money it costs and the city? they have free legal aid, but the city did not. with all the stuff that went on to north beach library, it would be interesting to find out how much it costs the city. there is another thing that is really important, too.

the compromise with the historic people so that instead of some knives hidden electrical thing, you can just get off of a bus anywhere, who have these extra things you have to get off. they have to be on top. i was on one of those buses and there wasn't a ramp. the police cleared out of this huge area of people because it was so dangerous. nobody got me off that bus. the police told me i should be patient because they were busy. supervisor wiener: thank you. when you hear the very soft bell, it means you have 30 seconds left. the deafening bell means time is up.

speaking directly into the microphone. >> i have prepared remarks, this is clear that the planning department is tone deaf and complicity with the more regionalization of resources in the city that are so significant that the state has told us to bypass the city in our context. and it has impact on tourism. the of the tourism dollars. how what to call for some of the african american property owners have tried have the properties preserved in have had all kinds of roadblocks from the city -- the city staff. some of them are here.

supervisor wiener: if you submit a card, we will call you and you will be able to speak. >> i have been here since 1972, and the remember buildings that preserve or restore, we would be carrying off the gingerbread instead of carrying wood shingles. it was a disaster. i remember when they tore off the facade had put something else on top of it. it was really terrible. now we have the support of preservation. have seen wonderful buildings around the world.

the environmental review takes three to six months. a lot with that long. it is one purchase. we have to get a survey done. >> i will be talking at turbo speed. i am interested in trying to figure out how a balanced policy such as the transit rich areas, transit oriented development, priority development. oriented areas and all the other policies that are going through city hall right now on land use. what i see here is a dilemma that can't be resolved in this room overnight. i don't see process flows from

normal citizens whether or not they are planning. the supervisor convene this meeting and i don't think there is a process flow. our point is pretty good and i don't see that today. how would like to see process flow. i have not seen as much as i would have liked. there are plans in place and we're going through surveys del. but also in the bayview district. that is another one. >> i have a homeowner in the valley of san francisco. i am here to express my extreme displeasure. i was required to higre an outside architect to produce a

report. the city charged me to have the city review it. architect's cost was approximately $3,000. it could of god to seismic reinforcement, building features, or other things. the city has chosen the most cumbersome, most expensive, and most time-consuming process that can be imagined. the result of it is that it discourages any type of increase to residential housing. >> i have a field services director helen partnership with the preservation. i worked with the organization

have a local government streamlining and demanding ordnances for educating of the benefits of historic preservation. organizations have existed in california for the distinct purpose of preserving the history of california and the resources to reflect the history. the goal of historic preservation like many other planning tools is not about stopping that change. it is about managing the change. it is about the sense of community pride, for future generations to enjoy. >> it will have clear processes and the incentives [chime] thank you. >> my name is sarah haden, i've

worked in construction where i currently live in district 8. i like to emphasize historic preservation or sustainability. it is about maintaining in utilizing our existing resources. san francisco is at the forefront of the trends. that includes the recycling of construction debris. recycling construction debris is not enough. words from the web site, we need to look beyond recycling and composting to get to the waist. we need to be accountable for the environmental impact that we all produce and use. our existing buildings are one of the most important budgets we have. we are all consumers of these existing buildings. policies should reflect this.

[chime] >> i am the land storage program manager at the same for it is parks trust. and these differences go parks trust is the nonprofit organization the partners with the recreation and park department to protect our parks and open space. he said francisco parks trust fully understands the value of preserving historical icons. we have led the way in the conservation efforts to preserve and restore the conservatory of flowers. we're concerned with -- if we make all of golden gate park historic district, this will impact responsible stewardship of the park. you can't put the entire park under glass.

i worked out a habitat restoration project in golden gate park. [chime] supervisor wiener: a queue. -- thank youy. -- you. [reading names]

>> i lived in the mission neighborhood, and this neighborhood is a proposed historic district. we are hoping to have that happen. what we need is to have that balance. i think they are doing a quite amazing job with that balance. only eight reviews and 99% in the projects. i feel like you are worried about things or overstating historic preservation control than what is needed. i hope you look at this carefully, where the projects, and make good decisions about historic preservation.

>> i would like to make a protest that the historic preservation commission was not given equal time with the other city departments to address the significance of the historic preservation issues in san francisco. i agree with the piece of john king this morning that there is nothing systematically wrong with a san francisco's policies for protecting its historic and architectural heritage. if you go back to 1967 when the article was inaccurate and you look at a picture of the skyline 5 or 10 years after that and compare it today, he will see that preservation has not awarded or trump development. in fact, the exact opposite is true.

if you look at south of market today, large parts of it looked like a ball about city. in short, there is nothing systematically the matter with the policies that we have in place. >> i will cut to the quick. perhaps allowing them to function by a improving the revisions to articles 10 and 11 might simplify and shorten the process and might avoid some of the reviews that everyone is complaining about. there is a dynamic balance between historic preservation and development. this is good for both historic preservation. it does not prevent or inhibit change. it just defines what needs protection by identifying how and where change to occur. and when it must be discreet.

you talked about the sustainability of historic preservation, but it does encourage new developments to be aware of context and hence the quality of the city. these are goals that in the city should have and should be a part of any project. in short, i don't think there is any conflict between direct preservation. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am a resident of san francisco, a real-estate consultant to developers and corporations with requirements here. my first development project is the conversion of st. joseph's hospital by buena vista park to condominiums, a conversion that was awarded landmark status. i believe this city risks losing a balanced approach, aside from historic

preservation, other things must be weighed in developing this, especially affordable housing and economic development. the problem is apparent in historic districts were non- historic buildings can potentially trigger eir's. we need a balanced approach. supervisor wiener: thank you very much. next speaker. >> i made a documentary film producer for the san francisco non-profit citizen film. we have made films about housing policy, so when my wife, public- school teacher at my parents, retired public schoolteachers, i was excited to repair the victorian we bought. our advice looking to prepare structures is not to do it. our family as 40% in the way

into our budget when the next- door neighbor began piling appeal after appeal of our building permits. after losing all of their claims before the board of appeals, they ask the board of supervisors to grant a costly historical review of our project. that appeal was denied, yet to date, because of delays in the appeal process and the costly nature of preparing for hearings, we have spent $65,000, a teachers' salaries for a year, a quarter of our construction budget. [tone] thank you for your consideration. supervisor wiener: thank you very much. >> i'm here on behalf of the san francisco housing coalition. we would say historic preservation does not come cheaply. it has a cost and has to be accounted for. if it does not implement carefully, it could hurt new housing production and sharply

reduce the affordability of housing, which is one of the biggest challenges. none balance preservation policy has a inherent balance toward high-end market housing, something you should think about in this. some of the unnerving proposals we have heard recently, particularly the rewrite of articles 10 and 11, some of this seems like a solution and search of a problem. we get it, but that was 40 or 50 years ago. what has been a wholesale destruction of our historic resources? we would say the long debate over the north beach public library and the -- [tone] the debate on 55 laguna street would prove historic preservation is not at risk in this town. >> i am with the small property owners of san francisco. two items -- on small items, i would recommend strongly that we

get the planning department staff more discretion. the news like windows -- to give permits through the department easily can mostly be done with more discretion on part of the staff, they're very effective. in the future, historic districts should reach out to the people in that district. the homeowners signed off on the district and know what is going on and they know what the future is. i appreciate you holding this hearing. supervisor wiener: thank you. kines beacon to the microphone? >> i am among the unlucky 8

mentioned earlier. just to give a snapshot of what a citizen experiences, this is to demolish a church, a dry rot, and sound church sitting on an and reinforced masonry foundation that is vacant. applications were filed in 2004 and two lawsuits against the city wanted to landmark the church. we prevailed in both lawsuits and in the court of appeals. it cost about $500,000 to take something like this through the process except with seven years under our belt, we are not through the process and is still going forward. one of the unfortunate things that occurs is that they act as magnets -- [tone] for all the worst elements of the city.

supervisor wiener: thank you very much. >> i will confine myself to the question of the work being produced by historic preservation. some advocates will say it produces more work than new construction. while that may be true in certain instances, as a general assertion, it fails. in all has to be taken in terms of specific instances and there are a variety of factors like square footage, building types and ultimate use of influence. i actually discussed this last week. i wanted to run my comments by him. both of us have done considerable amounts of both types of this work. he is in accord with me on my comments. not as clear a picture as they would like you to believe. things have to be taken one at a

time. thank you. >> i'm the president of the beaux triangle neighborhood association. i am a founding member of the friends of 1800, a gay preservation association. we landmark harvey milk camera store and it's a attraction to many people come to the castro. my market spans seven years. i'm still on the advisory committee. neighborhood and area plants were sold as a rational development tool. my neighborhood welcomed additional housing and we increased height limits on non historic structures and reduced some of historic structures. why are we changing this now? thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you. next speaker.

>> i get permits in san francisco very frequently. most of my clients are developers. i have plenty of single-family 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. preservation planning. i have restored these buildings