a road map for a blue print. finally we looked at various case studies the main thing we've learned is even to every building is different and you're not going to be able to do cost accounting we can make people better conservative to make building more efficient and from the improving the tenants experience of the environment >> so the graphic we developed that is in the report is a guide for successful rehabilitation it will break it down for the average person research which includes the understanding of the buildings historical use and

the plan and elevate assembling a collaborative team and execute that's conducting the rehabilitation. finally audit reviewing our goals and seeing whether you met those goals. another thing to highlight is that that's important to tailor passive energy systems to the buildings occupancy. a retail store that has a door that has it's door opening frequently will have different needs. the server room i mate want to have passive energy on floors it's for the time energies consumption >> here's another spread it

from our report we created this for intreej in the building as people decide how to get the best energy they start with the efficient steps fairs first. the first step is the window rehabilitation. maximum mgz daylight could be having lights coming into the building or using skylights and rehabilitating the windows can be as simple as stripping to help control airflow and heat conservation without having to replace anything. but rather to rehab. the next is wall installation that add thermal mass to the building we prioritized the roof it is a character defining

feature it can fit between the roof and the ceiling and not visible from the public right-of-way. wall installation is harder to implement in historic buildings without interfering with the characters but it can help. lastly the last two steps are the flooring and lighting. as explained we want to include the electrical tooltz to have the sources of energy. as we go back to the planning to tell. this 5 steps to prioritize implementation falls into the research and planning bublths you have to know the steps possible and before launching into the rehabilitation >> one of the cases studies is

the building we included this case stud because it was part of the brewer companies industrial context it's a good study not only for one building but for the historic area. you can see from the facade here that the middle sheet has replaced what used to be corp. gaited metal and that's a good example of how the design is used to not exactly mimic or copy but to mirror the past design without cop it. you if you're on the left side the historic facade of the original brick is included to crafting the new with the old. you can see the heavy timber

framing was preferred and we're looking at the perforated material this building overall ended up getting lead gold certification that's above and beyond what we want to do but the general take away this is an example of whether getting lead clafshgs or stripping our window you want to make our energy up front and revisit those by auditing once our building is occupied. another graphic we've created was 5 incentive areas that is why the developers should

consider past systems you can see the incentive areas the short term and long term goals we'll look at the highlight. first off it the energy efficient the greenest building is the building that's existing instead of tearing something down we encourage the technology such a windows instead of owning and operating a new puc. san francisco has so much character and history by keeping this alive in our building people want to work in the building. and one thing we hit on is a smart green design to enhance the quality of life. the daylights are a good quality of the building instead of

sitting under fake lights it will help morale in the marketplace. we see the pathologist systems as a part to create the eco aspect. we want buildings to be sustainable and support one another and as the city works towards the goals. financially we took away from our interviews that is a collaborative process looking at nonprofits and community and people that walk by the building we see this is is an opportunity to bring everybody into the fold >> all right. we end our document with an appendix of technical terms and a list of

the financial incentives to people who time to conduct this and we'll have a pdf on the website and hard copies available. we hope this will be a key document as we work towards the eco districts in the city this was not intended to be a complete manual but we hope this about give developers and researches to start this toward a mind of historic preservation >> thank you for your time and thank you tim and cell for your guidance i appreciate it. >> thank you very much. commissioners, do we have any questions or comments. commissioner pearlman

>> if i can figure out how this works you wanted an excellent job this is a useful document. i took a passive design course in 1981 in texas. and so it is certainly not a new expect but what's valuable i work with a lot of developers and if something like that were available as a bum on the first page of the website i've done a number of those concept it would be incredibly valuable i work with the developers and the word historic is a bad word it's going to cost me more and be a problem and incorporate what i want with something that already

exists so the breaking down of that mentality is what has to happen. i'm encouraging my clients to stop and breath before they freak out and having this available immediately hey read this first the issues of the money savings and the energy savings and the you know productions of go energy through eco is a long term thing that developers only think about short term because their renovating a building and selling that but running a building is all part of that in terms of selling a building even if they're not selling a building there's an incentive. did you guys look at net zero at all when you were outstanding this >> we looked at this a little

bit but again, because we're working in the central selma area not everybody is going to be looking for the net zero we wanted to present a basic slide to highlight the areas with the most impact so if someone wants to weather strip their building it won't get them to net zero but little victories. >> exactly it seems like with some of the bigger buildings that have expansive roof areas the one at the 2 henry adams has a massive revolver area if there could be cooperation i don't know how but power could be

generated there's this idea to distribute to other buildings would further enhance this is a great report. >> commissioner matsuda. >> yeah. thank you very much it was a great report did you reach other cities where similar studies have been done or reports such a - >> in looking at the greenest report we monthly focused on portland but we looked at other ones where systems were not as applicable but we tried to focus on what could be replicated here. >> i think in la they're planning to do something similar and they're including the

culture things not only to have buildings be reused by tenant but keeping the tenant who are engaging them to do you understand so what happens next. >> we're currently into review so we can approve it and hammering out the changes and hopefully getting it out to the public as soon as possible. >> thank you. >> commissioner hyland. >> thank you commissioner matsuda and great report a couple of ideas for us to think about. you don't think i don't want to burn you with a ton of research but our practice tries to incorporate the original design built into the buildings and the

mid century taken away. a couple of things the challenges is understanding the actual energy modeling of the building. i know you're talking about doing an audit but we've done energy modeling with buildings and in addition we've done window infiltration tests once out of replace or fix the deficiency in the building then you can have baseline to understand the dual glaz for example, is going to be great >> when we're looking at fire codes they allow for fire modeling that is performance based as opposed to the fire rated corridors and this is more

specific when you have trans summons that allow ventilation your fire marshall's want to you cover those up but if you do smoke control you'll have benchmarks to negotiate with the fire marshall and allow some of the natural ventilation. this is something that's close to what commissioner matsuda wags was talking about in san francisco there was movement in the beginning to create a san francisco 20, 30 district have you heard about that. so i can give tim contact information right now there's seattle and cleveland and pittsburgh and los angeles and denver and the notation is to bring building owners in the district together so that each

individual building didn't need to be net zero but as a district those performance goals can be achieved. so to henry adams could be producing for energy i'm happy to give your team the information but really in the next six months you'll see movement on the 20 thirty san francisco district >> thank you. >> commissioners any other questions or comments. and is there any public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. and this was informational so we'll move on >> commissioners item 9 discussions of recommendations. >> good afternoon,

commissioners tim fry staff it doesn't seemed to me that the members of the technology heritage are here as yet it's up to you if you want us to begin the discussion we're happy to do so but we have quite a bit time and if you'll entertain a short break we'll contact them. >> yeah. let's see how far we are out. >> so we'll commission back to. >> i'd like to welcome everyone back to the commissioners you left off in your regular calendar. >> good afternoon, commissioners tim fry the item before you is a

discussion of the spur heritage joint report that was published last summer in october when we heritage and spur first presented the report there was a desire to have a more thorough discussion where the department can respond to the recommends and how to prioritize some of the recommendations we didn't provide a written report in our packets in hopes of having a more broad discussion at this hearing in the commission or any member of the public may desire a more formal report we'll provide that once we have further direction from president

hasz and the commission. i'd like to dive into some of the recommendations that the departments general position on the recommendations. and how to moved on a couple of the topics that are outlined carla is here from spur and andrea is here and mike from san francisco architecture heritage they might have some additional comments. in addition along with director ram jeff the director of current planning is also here to provide some background if you need it and sarah john's our environmental review officer is present if we need to have o a more robust conversation.

with that a couple of remarks the department is in general all the time and spur acknowledged many of the recommendations have been addressed in part or whole by the department in a variety of different ways as for our public outreach sequa process streamlining and our approach to the applications of the standards with the district. there are a couple of the recommendations that we do feel need or warrant future discussion the department has a couple of ideas to achieve possibly some compromise with the recommendations that has to do in part to desire to streamline our process and not add any process to the public or

staff or commission but also in regards to our own staff support and the resources the department has and what is considerable for us to achieve given our current workload. with that, i want to quickly breakdown the recommendations into 3 categories 1 to 6 are the general resource strategies. the recommendations in some talks about or encourage the development of the citywide survey and incorporating the survey early in the process to approve the best outcome and consider historic resources early in the planning process in regards to any zoning changes that may or priorities that come

up. we agree with this from your budget discussions a few months ago the department is committed to scoping a citywide survey in our next budget based on quick ball park figures it could take up to 4 years to complete the survey and that is do not on a variety of factors the capacity of the consultants and the department staff and the the capacity of this commission in hearing all the survey hearings and adapting them but we'll report back to you on a clearer road map and the resources needed to implement the citywide survey program. hopefully later this year and also wanted to point out that conducting the surveys early in

the planning process is a standard procedure so the department can get the report. it was in general response to how the eastern neighborhood surveys were reported which came later and we've learned a lot since then. to give you examples we'll have a culture landscape survey to proximity pipeline projects with dpw, puc and rec and park we want that landscape in place to help guide the projects. the central selma plan related to the folds plan you just

reviewed the central selma plan will be moving 0 through the eir process soon. and the stave office of historic preservation has offered us neighborhood commercial district survey grants that's currently flew in anticipation of any ada upgrades that result from a soft story ryan white ordinance and which of those buildings that quality or, in fact, surveys. in regards to the reports recommendations about increased public participation and notification again, i feel like

we've learned a lot of sense the eastern neighborhoods it's developed as part of the sunset survey and many of those components are standard. parts of our outreach plan given any historic resource survey but we appreciate the way the report oonlz that a survey outreach effort this is a aphasia to be fine tuned to the audience it is trying to reach and the level of participation we're essentially seeking. with the sunset survey we had without any doubt updates and historic walk tours and local cafes involved and standard community meetings. that might not be the best use of our resources in another

loshgs for example, the neighborhood survey we've got to reach out businesses and tenants and we've found out that they motive not attend community meetings so maybe a one-on-one meeting with the tenant will future more awareness about the neighborhood survey so to create a boilerplate set of guidelines for our survey community outreach survey we think that maybe a little bit premature we have to fine town this outreach plan with the project. our communications folks in the planning department do have as a sort of a longer plan to have a

participation and outreach plan and guidelines for the department this will provide the outreach for any outreach the department conducts it's beneficial to have something in writing it should be a boarder effort than our preservation efforts. with that, those are the only i believe i've addressed each the recommendations except for the report recommendations that the planning commission have an opportunity to weigh in on the rimentsz for the adaptation. the department does share all event notifications and copies of historic context statements with the planning commission. throughout the intoifr process

some commissioners in particular are interested in those outreach efforts and some have attended events and some have acquired with the presently planners if they've had any questions so we feel they're kept abreast of the projects and the surveys but doesn't feel it necessary to have a formal preservation before the commission prior to adapting those documents with that, i'll stop and see if my colleague has anything to add >> good afternoon, commissioners thank you for having this hearing it's really great to see some interest in our publication i really appreciate it i appreciate the departments efforts to go through the recommendations and address them. i want to point out a couple of

things on the solicitation the first is we recommended that the context statements go to the planning commission for the recommendation so they can provide feedback so that was the recommendation i think it would still be appropriate to do that and the other recommendation we had kind of under the same number 3 to include a member of the public on the survey advisory group as well to insure some contingent but this overarching comments the citywide survey one of the reasons we came to that recommendations the sequa staff is the real meet and potatoes of the recommendation it had to be

with the contributors to the districts so the citywide survey could help identify where the contributors are for the public is really important i urge the department to focus on areas were there might be some development activity going on right now that haven't been recently surveyed that's where the condemnation is >> i'm going to comment on this within would i really you think into this in the residential areas the developers higher professionals and so they're probably more apt what is frustrating for the public in a residential area to it pushes their project back. my hope is to get the survey