criteria because this fountain was created with over 2 hundred school kids and i i think one hundred and 50 form people who live here in san francisco. it was probably one of the first grass rots projects that of created in a public space that's very san francisco very 1970s. you should add something to that and criteria 2 ruth is a pretty white light known figure go to her website and see her pieces of work start at $150,000. this needs to be considered when you consider the individual. and what i can lend to you or give you a copy there was actually a 49 page booklet and

it was called ruth for the san francisco foundation. that could give you a lot more historical context to the fountain >> if i could just somewhere commissioners you have a comment. >> i want to make a motion. >> my comment would be if we're rode to make a motion the only over residing issue is the section 134. we can take it up so commissioner johns. i do think that the offer arching at home is the compatibility of the district but when it comes down to our. view and a today, i think the word elegant was used the big e

word and in keeping with the evolving tradition of union square as a major retail and a park setting and continual branding for more than over one hundred years. i'll add conditions related, however, commissioner matsuda or someone want to amend the months ago to include conditions to the fountain >> i want to add a friendly amendment to ask that the plan work closely with our family and they've agreed to work with pager and a turning balance and be sensitive to the context of the fountain and a bring back to planning a specific plan about how that's going to be. this was first applying do and

now it's a delicate project when you touch it up at all it should be removed as a whole. it's important that you see a very much more than what we see today a very clear complex sensitive plan about how it's going to be taken apart or removed and stored and put back together >> we'll say the family gets involved. >> i'll second the motion as amended. i'd like to add an amendment >> i want to make one quick comment about the evolving nature of any city we're looking at the moore store he would have to get a variance there would be

a lot of things that are not compatible but those are buildings that get cherished in the future. my amendment would be the 6 bay design hi >> that will be in observer draft motion. >> the draft most. >> for the 6 bays. >> right no amendment. sorry. i remove that >> it's the staff recommendations. correct >> so we want to reread that - >> i saw a fountain i don't remember where i read this is there any stipulation we can put on i think there is a question about who is responsible i know the answer is the project

sponsor is having is there any economic. >> the permit won't go forward. >> right but could we put a bond on the fountain? >> well, there's no way this can be redone. >> right. i'm afraid it will get lost mar make sure it doesn't get lost >> basically, it's all one piece and it bonds together it looks like you're going to pick it up. >> commissioner hyland the last time i'm aware of a major project building was approved with the stipulation that it certain parts of it be take care

of it was the yes, ma'am porm and that ended up costing the project several millions of dollars. >> that was retroactive. >> it took a lawsuit. is there that any chance? >> we have a motion on the floor if we could reread or rope the friendly amendments please. >> , of course, commissioners there's a motion and second on the floor that was amended for the sponsor to work closely with the family and work sneflly with the fountain to have a sensitive plan for the movement and it's restorati

restoration. submitted >> oh, absolutely to the department. >> shall i call the question? >> you mean the roll. >> yes. >> on that motion then commissioners commissioner hyland. ass >> as much as i like the construction. >> commissioner matsuda. i'm going to say yes, but i have a concern about the legislation >> commissioner pearlman. >> i've been fretting over this for days and days i'll vote yes. >> commissioner wolfram and president hasz. so moved, commissioners, that passes 6 to one with commissioner hyland voting against. commissioners that places you on

item 10 for case 2013 at 845 montgomery street for certificate of appropriateness. if people who are leaving thegr. >> commissioner. you left off open your regular calendar for case 2013 at 845 montgomery street request for a certificate of appropriate. good afternoon, commissioners. kelly department staff. the project before you is a request for the certificate of appropriateness for 845 montgomery street a building within the jackson square

project of the planning code. it was constricted in 1910 and historically is known also the hotel ervin is a georgia style brick building with windows on the second and third floors and contrary front on the federal reserve. it was constructed in 23408 the penthouse and cultivated in toil. the proposed project is for the jelling restoration and the recladding of the two story addition sporadic it includes the cleaning and putting a bring on the montgomery facade and the light walls and the rehabilitation of the would do windows and painting the walls and cleaning and painting the

anniversary historic stole and planning i painting the gaud rails and in kind replacement of floor tiles and decks and revolver and in kind of stabilization of railing and new flashing and many replacement of existing plate tile with the 23408 edition with the new compatible toil in a muted tile measuring 12 inch by 24 inch laying in a pattern in that finish to simulate nature stone. based on the spivengz and a correspondence with the design team it meets the standard for

rehabilitation and proportions for article 10 for the following reasons. the proposal will address the requirements and in the 2008 addition for the proposal respects the character and a designing features and the landmark district. the architecture features of the building will be maintained and that replacement materials will not affect the overall this and the materials will match the material in design and texture and all new materials for the 2008 addition will be deafened as contrary all the rationed.

based on those finding the department recommends approval of the project with the two issues. prior an example of the proposed combrout will be forwarded for review and approval by the planning department preservation staff and the mentioned elevations showing the new partner will be forwarded and approved by the preservation staff. the department received no public inquires for general information about the project. i have just been informed today that the project sponsor would liquor to discuss the possibility of a different tile selection as part of the department we feel support the selected toil within our project sponsor toil that is the lighter color may hazed important

compatibility with the existing landmark district which is much more muted tune, you know, stone or a masonry attach material. i'll let the project architect who is here to prepare a short presentation review some of the details on the work as well as present to you some of the changes we have not had a chance to review. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm the project architect. we are addressing problems that were caused by construction defect. the new part of the building was clad with a slate toil which is

a natural stone and i believe it compatible with the general colors within the historic district. the problem is the slate contra covert we're forced to remove it and place a tile that minimum ice cream the slate. we've had a person who helped us and said a material that minimum ikdz the slate is not acceptable so we're trying to find something pits agreeable to the owners. the owners want something that matches what they already have on the building. the building is we documented it's obey in movies and the accent color on the building

went from light to dark gray. some of the colors are still there the dark gray is close to the color of the slate that the owners went to go back with a porcelain but we having had historically a lighter gray. instead of a bacon color to go with the light or dark gray and also this matches the building historically. we have samples of the toil including the toil hates suggested by planning. >> this is the toil suggested by planning it's in your packet. >> it's actively any questions ice cream what's on the

montgomery street facade. and a could you hold up think the first one you had from planning >> it had shades the light gray and the bailgz. >> can i ask a question. so the brown one is the one requested by the department and what's the gray one? >> either. >> either of those would be acceptable. okay. thank you. >> thank you. >> and that's the end of the presentation. >> yes. thank you. >> all right. commissions any questions. >> i actually have a question.

so this was built in 2000. >> 2008. >> and the citywide was approved at that time. >> i specifically remember this one. this is beyond a secondary facade it sits so far back you have to roll look for it to see that interest so my recollections there's no issues to cabin with with discolortion we were happy just to see the building >> it was only brought before the commission this time around because of the change in the material and anything that is secondary materials there's stone tile vs. porcelain toil that's the reason it's brought

before you. >> thank you. any other questions from commissioners? okay. we'll open up comment? any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. back to you, commissioners. commissioner pearlman >> you know i don't see any reason why the color is even an issue here. if it can't be seen from the street the owner should have some say and the light brown and gray are so close in terms of reflexion and light in the area duo i don't see where we should interfere with something donates not visible at all and at least let the owner do something and why not let me let them rope that >> i'll comment it is slightly be visible but it's so far back

and it's a better alternative in color. uncommon >> i agree with commissioner. >> it's technically visible from the right-of-way. >> commissioners. commissioner johnck >> i move approval of the staff recommendations but agree the owner should choose the color. >> i actually have a comment i don't like the dark gray i'd be fine with the light gray it's visual from the street. >> okay light gray (laughter). >> for staff recommendation

whichever. >> do we have a second. commissioners there's a moved and seconded to approve the light gray option or the original staff recommendation. on that motion commissioner hyland. commissioner johnck. commissioner johns. commissioner matsuda. commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and president hasz. so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on item 11 for case 1115 >> pardon me i need a recustodials. >> i make a motion for a recustodials. >> you can recuse yourself. item 11 the union iron works i believe there's a requester

inform a recall >> i make a motion to recuse commissioner hyland. commissioner hyland. commissioner johnck. commissioner johns. commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and a president hasz so moved, commissioners, that motion passes commissioner hyland is so recused. >> good afternoon, commissioners department staff. the project before you is a nomination of the national historic register it was perpetrate for the port of san francisco. in its capacity as a certified local government the city and county of san francisco is give the authority to comment on the commission and it will be forwarded to the commission of the office of historic

presently. it's a maritime district 10 non-contributing resources this includes the cranes and segments & of the rails and this is for the criteria a and criteria c. under criteria a that the nationally significant for the steel house shipbuilding in the united states and it's shipbuilding and it's wartime vessels. under the criteria c it's local significant and the physical record of the trend and architecture. it began in 1884 about the construction of the shipyard and that ends at the close of world war two. it was the end of the construction on world war two.

0 as an industry leader from the spanish american war the union iron historic district is associated with the american shipbuilding industries. the department argz usa agrees for its architecture and design it illuminates design specifically shipyard architecture. it got a revision and it revise the boundary to include the richest hill from the 901. the revisions to the boundary occurred on packages 146 and 47

and on a b d and 17 and 18. you've been provided copies of all the revised packages and asks for comments from the commissions. and in conclusion as commissioners asked to over an opinion as to whether it meets the standard and it was to be forwarded to the office of prehistoric observations. nancy golden beggar is present and has prepared a short prevention and march is here to answer questions. i'm available for any questions that concludes my presentation >> thank you.

>> once you start speaking sfgovtv will subscriber to the screen. >> i'm nancy i'll spend the next few minutes covering the 2 hundred package nomination. union iron works is one of the best preserved of the shipyards. it's also one of the longest operating shipyards in the country it's 65 acres that includes number one contributing structures as well. we prepared one statement for criteria a and one for c that has 1834 to 1830 significance.

and this boundary evenly cups it's maximum period of time construction 178945 and also includes irish hill. as you can - union iron works opened in 188 had the two world wars were periods of especially robust activity and growth. during the 19 state of these the site included 6 main buildings and a wharf. building 1 this or that and 14 is located prominently on 20th street and was engineered by dr. during the course e malice.

it was a machine shop and it connected in the middle in 1914. in the late 179 it was at the cutting-edge of the materials management it was an on the part of and it's driveway dock was known cross country. it was built on 20th street and designed by perry and a hampton who designed the sharpening building in golden gate park. it has a world war 2 era at the rear. those were some of the vessels that were built and unfortunately love of the graphics are lost.

the earlier part of the 420th century. it was constructed in 19 hundred is the only building left and it's one of the first steel framed buildings on the site. i'm sorry. in the early 20th century there were some interesting architecture developments reinforced concrete was trod and several more prominent architect design buildings and also a number of u actually telethon buildings were destined one was building one hundred 2 and this was designed by architect charles wheat and that is of

reenforced concrete. another building building 109 replaced construction on the same site. this is also one of the first steel framed and corrugated metals on the site. we'll now look at 3 different buildings from world war one all built in 1917. the first is building 101 that is a steel building all clad what stucco and most importantly the office seen of vertigo was filmed here. this was also constructed and is concrete framed with masonry with annoyed office and

warehouse uses and has beautiful brickwork. finally, my favorite building 115 and 16 uses an concrete frame. i included this warehouse in berlin it shares many of the same features as my favorite buildings. the little facilitates constructed between 1813 and 36 many of the other yards close down. in 1941 to 45 was a period of rapid development and