we don't understand why the - you know, we don't understand the reason for why that the desk should be held up so hopefully it will continue >> thank you. tere teresa. oh, i'm sorry thank you very much and john truman. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is john i'm an owner of the joint property on union street. i note that council for the 280 and 86 testimony doesn't dispute a single issue but dismisses them all as unrelated.

building height and buildable areas not only gateways because of the net of the contains it results in a demolishing sightlines and views within the telephone graph hill district. i urge you to continue with the full proceedings >> thank you any public comment on this item? seeing none, back to you, commissioners. . commissioner johnck. >> well, i'm not convinced there's been miss steps on the part of the staff and especially listening to the system today and reading the materials and also reading the departments work program for the next year i wouldn't support a hearing on this so - >> thank you commissioner

pearlman. >> i wanted to say all the concerns all this information about the building permits from the 1980s that thas has no bearing on what we're considering today. if it's true the only thing we're considering is the in kind replacement of the desk i believe the staff issued it correctly and wouldn't support a hearing for this >> thank you commissioner johns. >> i agree with the prior two commissioners. the wrong simmering dispute between those two neighbors is going to be resolved. this is not the proper place to resolve it based on the matter that we have before us. that is the in kind replacement.

there are other issues and we shouldn't use this in kind question in order to open up other business >> commissioners, any questions or comments? >> do we need a motion. >> commissioners you should make a motion and the motion would be either to hold a hearing or not hold the hearing. >> i make a motion to not hold a hearing. >> thank you. >> on that motion to not commissioner hyland. commissioner johnck. commissioner johns. commissioner matsuda. commissioner castillo. commissioner wolfram and commissioner president hasz. sfoomz o so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously and places you on president reports my when

are we going to invest that >> commissioners at the end of last year the planning commission updated and rice their rules and regulations i'll make the same recommendation to this body. it's been sometime you may want to revisit some of the hearing measures that would enlighten the public as far as what the speaking order and presentation accidents afforded at least from my point of view it would be helpful for me and the public themselves. so if you want that maybe we can begin entertaining issues with the officers at our monthly meeting and we could calendar

for adaptations >> let's do that the other one that comes up is the election of officers so at the end of the year we want to wait until the members are seated so it pushes it off until march so let's do the offers elections rather than january one. now whether or not you agree with that we'll talk about that. if there's other issues in the meantime if you could shot my do you have a note. that was all my comments for now >> if 0 nothing further move on to the draft minutes for the, 2013 review committee meeting and the draft meeting for the december 14th accounting regular meeting. >> commissioner pearlman.

i want to thank i for capturing a word i didn't and dense meeting on december 4th. there were a couple of names not spelled correctly. on page 2 a is jamming ma graft >> i'm sorry this is under the committee review meeting. >> yes. >> two presenters james mcgraft that's not the spelling of his name. >> i'll note that. >> on payment 3 under my testimony about 60 percent it talks about the dow park and pauly is pa lecturing l e you

didn't y that's the dallas mime of art. then on page 5 under director rams system it talks about the bears building i think that's the beers building >> yes. indeed. >> let's see then on page 8 the second paragraph under my testimony near the bottom it says but it seems like an ingenious it should be a disingenuous it's the second to last sentence in my testimony the first of the second last line it should say a disingenuous it changes the meaning. page 10 james mcgraft again.

and then page 11 commissioner wolfram's i'm a little bit on the defense i simply meant on the fence (laughter) >> and that was i'm sorry. >> page 11 commissioner wolfram's testimony. other than that i thought well captioned. >> oh, yeah. a little bit on the fence. >> commissioner hyland. on page 2 under my testimony in addition to the sliver s l iv e r. indeed thank you. so i move to adapt the in that was it; right?

>> i move to adapt. >> let's take this ar c it's separate. >> yeah. i should accept some any public comment? >> so we'll do any public comment on the ar c minutes. seeing none, public comment is closed back to you, commissioners. >> motion to adapt and we're taking it separate. >> so there's a motion and a second for the ac or r.c. minutes commissioner honda. commissioner johnck. commissioner johns arrest commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and commission president hasz that so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 7 to zero >> thank you, commissioners any comments open our regular meeting minutes for

december 4th. seeing noneseeing none - oh, >> i move approval. >> we also do comments on the minutes. >> yes. seeing none, back to you, commissioners. >> motion to approve. >> second. second. and then on that motion to adapt the minutes for december 4th >> sxhvld. commissioner johnck. commissioner johns. sxhait. commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and commission president hasz u president hasz so moved, commissioners, that motion passes names 7 to zero and for your benny want to acknowledge my assistant who transcribes your comment margaret with our staff so thank you to her. commissioners that will placed you on item 9.

commissioner matsuda. >> i had a meeting last week with 9 overlook team and had a phone call with supervisor breed's office regarding the marcus book store fundraiser and if you have information on the fundraiser i want to make sure it was related to all the other commissioners. >> just for clarity that fundraiser is for marcus book store to buy the building. >> that's correct. >> so they can - . okay commissioner pearlman. >> thank you. i want 20 comment on an article in the chronicle about the locations that were being proposed. i was astonished at the comment likely we should tear down the

bill graham auditorium and his comment was that will never, ever happen and he said it was a piece of garbage and he's been significant to our city a state senator and judge he's just being flippant about it but at the same time it is how the public sees our historical upper fantastic and it was followed up up in socket site or curb site and there were many, many comments from the public on this blog but, yeah tear that thing down and who cares. i don't know what to say we need

to continue to promote what we do. from my clients there's fears about being considered historical because we night packing pick at the size and essentially they think we're going looking at the leaves instead of the effort. so i'm sorry we weren't in session at the time i think a letter to the chronicle or directly to the chinning cop from this commission to express our shock and dismay he cares for our historic buildings so little might be something we consider to do but i was outraged at taking our history away >> commissioner johns. >> at one point we discussed

working with the board of realtors to develop a program to explain historic preservation to them so they could perhaps explain it to potential clients. i wonder where are we on that. were they interested >> we're actually arthritis the california prestige so they've set up the infrastructure there are 4 exponents to that program and it's going to be 3 realtors or have a single reality firm looks like pacific union basically, it launches in march. thank you, mr. fry and a commissioner just in response to

commissioner matsuda's question going i don't have any information about the meeting but we'll disseminate it to the h pc. and one quick disclosure i went over and did a quick peak at the veterans building this morning and want to see how the light impacts. any other - >> commissioner matsuda. thank you. i want to be informed about 18 street and i thought ms. howard brought up a good point and i want the material agendized about the recreational element >> thank you. commissioners, if there's nothing further we'll move on

for consideration fortunes item 10 at 345 stockton o ton street request for a permit is proposed for continuance until february 14th. i have one speaker card. and would like to advise the members of the public you can only present the card for continuance not the information >> do we have any questions or comments from the staff about the continuance. >> yes. >> jason sorry my writing is not the clearest. i'm jason i'm here with the united service workers west and

i spoke about this. i'm supportive of the thought continuance. i'm sure this is sufficient time. we submitted sophisticated denims and not waste trees it will be electronically. we think the way this project is being considered this legislation piece is over here and there is not consistent with serial killer and we're creating a mess itself is innovate mess that may involve other possible historic buildings that may affect our district and not obeying being considered at the same time with the project. i'll share those longer comments but having thirty days for the

environmental decisions preekdz bringing it back on that date. also i look forward to seeing the minutes from the architecture review f it was a good discussion but not incorporated by the environmental planner in another part of the process. again we're you're going all the bodies to consider this project as required under sequa together as opposed to piecemeal >> let me finish any public comment? any other member wishes to speak on the continuance. commissioner pearlman has a comment for the last speaker >> i would quite following you had talked about that certain parts the process were being handled over here and there what is that. >> i meant because there's two

buildings on the property and one is the overlook store site they're to demolish is but because that's part of the hotel when the hotel was built the floor ratio was way out of change so they require legislation in order to deal with the issue to continue to be out of compliance with the floor area ratio. >> i'm trying to understand what that has to do with our hearing being in the historic district and so there are issues which are particular to this review but the piece of legislation which was i guess has been talked about in the press and other whereas, a piece of spot legislation it effects 58 other

properties within the historic district that might have more than one building on the same site that's what i was referring to. >> thank you. commissioners, any questions or comments? >> i have one question and a commissioner johnck. >> actually i'd be interested to hearing is a month enough time is that the question before us? well proposed continuance to february 5th is a month >> but our hearing is on february 4th. >> you're right. >> commissioner hyland. >> is it completely voluntarily to bring it before the pr c or the ar c before coming to the h c. >> the ar c is a voluntarily

procure though in this case as in many cases there's you usually only one ar c meeting and we felt the project team worked oofrment to respond to the ar cs comments so we thought enough time had transpired so on a side note, you know, my recommendation or the departments recommendation would be to continue it to the fifth and if the commission at that time when you have the plans and all the information and the departments analysis if you feel that more time is needed we can continue it further down the rod. >> thank you, mr. fry any other

comment. i wanted to see the only building was 76 mission and that's in the 10 year span. yes? >> i wanted to know the status of the environmental review on this. >> tim fry department staff. i believe the environmental is near completion. i don't have any information other than i know our historic review has been completed. the environmental planning maybe compiling the final document >> and when will that be complete. >> it will be for the next hearing and complete. >> okay. commissioner on the matter for continuance. >> i move february 5th. >> and did you have a comment y7bd that commissioner johnck.

>> call the roll please. on that motion to continue this item to february 5th sxhvld. commissioner johnck. commissioner johns. commissioner matsuda. commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and president hasz that motion so moved, commissioners, that motion passes and and places you under your consent calendar and there will be no separate discussion of those items unless the staff so requires and the item be considered as a separate item. item 11 case forego 900 north point street a certificate of appropriatene appropriatene

appropriatene appropriatene appropriatene appropriateness there are nospectro cards audience i move to approve. on that motion to approve sxhvld. commissioner johnck. commissioner johns. commissioner matsuda. commissioner pearlman. and commission president hasz pr so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you under your regular calendar. we have a remit to move it to the end of the regular calendar we'll skip over that >> we have a consensus. >> thank you, commissioners. in that case we'll hear item this or that for l to henry

ooltdz street for the landmark designation. >> good afternooncytes parks department staff. it's an item labored for adams street for the dunn up building. the landmark designation report was put together by a consultant and tim will further spus discuss that. to briefly talk about that this building is the only remaining and most prominent business location a business that was active in san francisco from 18949 to 19637. the company transcribed directly to the gold rush and for the post 1906 in the city.

it was constructed in 1915 in the early traditionally style. the first store has a concrete foundation and it's clad in red brick. it has a one story basis and has concrete spaces. it retains a high-level of integrity and the interior was from 1915 to 19637. while the building is not on the landmark list people expressed an interest. the landmark related policy found in the plan for the hill plan the designation will include one of the parks and yet

there's a small triangle part. the character of the exterior of the building the interior elevation and ground floor restaurants and details. the interior is that a are not covered by the landmark designation. the association with the significant event and architect and the landmark status ask warden. we ask for a noomgs and initially designation was put in our packet. at this time you may consider forwarding it to the board of supervisors a recommendation supportive of landmark designation.

in earlier 10 there's a designation. this concludes my presentation and then tim and shawn murphy. thank you. >> mr. president, and commissioners. there's not much to add to what susan said unless we want to stay a couple of hours. it's american people interesting building and well intooifrg of the landmark status. it's deserving to the history of san francisco and the architecture history. you know, it's about that an interesting project. i don't think you could find another building that more perfectly follows the graft of san francisco history.

you know, in that it was built for a company that was one of the prime per varies of mining equipment during the gold rush that second degree us into building hardware during the reconstruction after the earthquake and flier and now has found, you know, a near perfect adapt active reuse. so this is all around i think a success story for preservation. really that's all i want to say if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them before the historical aspects of it. >> thank you, commissioners any questions for staff or sponsor. >> seeing none, thank you. do we have any member of the

public or you have more sponsor - >> yeah. great. >> good afternoon shawn murphy bay west development. it's owned and operated several places for almost 40 years. over those 40 years we've preserved the design center and the other property we own is the gallery it's adjacent 101 adams total 6 seven hundred square feet and we have two sites in direct approximate that will help with the ground floor show rooms and serving retail to the area. we've seen a great deal of change to the district in the 40 years and most importantly in th