library and look up page 120 to find out what happened. but being a little strong on this, but i think what i would like to hear from for the city and in the document is how is this different from urban renewal of the 60's? i kind of know the answer to that and of course we have environmental documentation and we have our great preservation and our commission oversight that is a great boone to what we're looking at now in assessing the project. i just would like to hear more about what's different in the 21st century than the 60's and in creating a new vision for the city. i noticed quite a bit of emphasis on the historic american building survey. i

think the historic american landscape survey would be helpful here. there's a lot in that part of the city that -- the geology, the land forms, the landscape, basically that would be helpful to understanding the context of how we're looking at the buildings and the infrastructure that is being proposed for change and renovation. so those are my ideas at the moment. >> thank you. and i will just repeat commissioner wolfram's comment about the alleyways. they have completely taken out the character of the alleyway. that's my comment and i will draft this into a letter. seeing no other questions or comments into the commission we will move on to the next item. >> i have one question and it's a follow-up from what commissioner johnck was talking about. what is the process for -- because, you know, i opened

the document and saw the 740 pages and almost fainted. i had to dig to find out where is the information that i need to look at this. and, you know, found one or two pages like that that, you know, talked about this. i couldn't even really imagine the particular buildings in the context of the new -- of the project. so is there a forum that we will have in the future that will describe this project or is this something that will only be fully vetted out at the planning commission? i don't know if that's a mike jacinto question. >> yes, michael jacinto planning staff. this is the only stop we have scheduled here before this commission. there is on november 20th going to be the hearing on the draft eir but we're also discussing and scheduling an informational hearing at the commission also. >> for the same day? >> yes, that's my

understanding. >> so there will be a full presentation by the developer? >> no details yet but, yes, we've been discussing some sort of project discussion or presentation. >> at the planning commission. >> at the planning commission, correct. >> so not here. >> not here. this is our only stop. >> that tells you a little bit about historic buildings. >> so we will close this item. >> thank you, commissioners, moving on to item 8, case no. 2014.18, the ferry building certificate of appropriateness. >>. >> i need to recuse myself from this item, high -- my firm has been working on this project. >> i move rerecuse. >> second. >> on that motion to recuse commission wolfram,

commissioner hyland, yes. commissioner pearlman, yes. and commission president hasz, yes. commission wolfram is hereby recused, thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners, before you is a request for review of proposed work at the ferry building which is designate i had at city landmark no. 90 and as a contributing resource to the national resource listed embarcadero resource project. the proposed project is for alterations to the north facade of the building which faces the embarcadero. this building was restored in the early 2000's. this includes installation of partial height painted steel modular structures to provide 5

retail kiosks, lighting and radiant heaters are also integrated into the design and construction. infill of non-historic windows in the east wall of the ferry building north arcade where the new retail kiosks will be constructed and installation of up to 5 new pedestrian door openings also in the east wall of the ferry building. staff finds that the proposed work will be in conformance with the requirements of article 10 and the secretary of interior's standards for rehabilitation. the work is compatible with the historic structure while being clearly differentiated will not result in the removal of historic fabric and the historic character of the landmark building will be preserved. the new kiosk will have non-historic material and will be configured to retain the arches, columns and spatial relationships that characterize the north arcade. installation of the new retail kiosks will

allow the full width of the arcade to be more visible than is the case with the existing steel storage structures and a 10 foot wide corridor will be maintained the length of the arcade to provide continuity with the historic circulation patterns. the proposed design utilizes materials that are characteristic of the building and employs a design aesthetic that is clearly contemporary but does not compete with the architectural expression of the arcade or the embarcadero facade of the ferry building. in order to ensure that the details of the design are consistent with the character and visible qualities of the landmark building, the department does recommend the following: that upon completion of construction drawings the following material be submitted to the planning department preservation staff for review and approval and these are, 1, that attachment details for the mod drar kiosk structure including case work, seating,

signage, et cetera, to the east wall of the ferry building be provided, 2, that construction details of the new pedestrian openings in the east wall of the ferry building be provided and, 3, that finished samples to the case doors also be provided. no public comment has been received since the packet materials were submitted. as this project does not require a city permit the hpc's actual purview is limited to reviewing comment and making findings of compliance with the secretary of interior standards and the standards of article 10 rather than in the granting of a c of a, so we would request that we amend the draft motion in front of you before you act on it to state that you are adopting -- reviewing comment findings for compliance with

the secretary's standards and article 10 standards for this property. but we can get back to that when we're ready for that. so our preliminary recommendation for the project is approval with the suggested conditions. this concludes my presentation unless you have questions and i believe the project sponsor also has a presentation. thank you. >> good afternoon, mark pias, i'm preservation consultant for the port. i wanted to make a few introductory remarks from the port's perspective in the way of background. first of all the rehabilitation project of the building anticipated that there would be retail use in this space. in fact, it actually included an approval of a concept which was erecting what

were essentially free-standing news stand type kiosks that you could circulate around. that portion of the project was never built out and then, second, the port has been working with equity office for two years to try to refine this design to get it to the point where it is today that we were comfortable with it and feel that it does meet the secretary of the interior's standards. and for this new approach, which is essentially they are semi-enclosed spaces rather than that original project. the port felt strongly maintaining the historic use of the arcade included in this and for that reason we stipulated that there should be a 10 foot circulation corridor maintained on the outer edge. and as well that the two end north and south ends be designated as

areas for open seating. you will see that in your packets in the design. the port also has concerns about potential conflicts with the retail use in this space spilling out and what that might or might not do on farmer's market days and however, we have worked through all of those issues and we're comfortable that those have been adequately addressed and that those conflicts are not, no longer a concern to the proposal. so at that point we instructed equity office to go ahead and file for the certificate of appropriateness. additionally because the building has such high civic importance the port recommended that there be additional outreach. we have taken the project to our port's northeast waterfront advisory group and also to san francisco heritage

and both parties have been very supportive of the project. and then touching on the issue that your staff mentioned regarding the permitting, the port would be the agency that would permit the construction. we would issue the building permit. we have read the conditions of approval on the proposed c of a and although it technically wouldn't be a certificate of appropriateness, we are comfortable imposing those conditions on the approval of the building permit. thank you. if you have any questions i'll be available. >> good afternoon, i'm jane connors, i'm senior property manager of the building and i've been on the property since december 2002. being part of the landlord and management team over the last over 10 years we have learned that we are more stewards of a cultural institution than landlords of a mixed use building. the ferry building is 1 -- one of the

most beloved iconic buildings of san francisco and certainly one of the most important offices with the equity office's portfolio. as mark said, it's taken two years to develop these draws, careful consideration. everything we do at the ferry building is done, you know, with careful thought and i know one of the most gratifying parts of my job, of my team's job is bringing in small businesses and providing them a permanent brick and morter space to begin their first for ray into business and one of our great success stories is taking james freeman from blue bottle coffee from a coffee cart out in the ferry plaza and providing him one of his first shops in his growing business, but those are great stories to tell and we know we have more to tell which is why we're looking for more spaces to develop in the ferry building. we have a long list of local

businesses that are interested in getting a foot in the building and since the local story came out about this hearing and our presentation today i want you to know we have 25 local businesses that have sent inquiries to wanting to be a part of these shops. so i am going to hand this over to our team at tef, they have done an exquisite job considering all the historic, you know, guidelines within the area that we're looking to develop and bringing in, i think, some of the most, you know, exquisite potentials in which for these retail businesses to operate. so thank you. >> miss messino, you have 8 minutes left. >> i am joanna low from key note design. we feel that with the development we've gone through with equity and the port that a solution in front of you kind of responds to a

need of wanting to preserve circulation and openness of the arcade. the kiosks are partial height, they do not go to the full height of the underside of the arcade, they actually sit below the historic sign band and then, you know, the feature that we have on the top is that there is all the mechanical equipment and additional and piping and things like that would be hidden from view. so we've taken a look at the views from outside the arcade and also within the arcade to try to conceal and make these kiosks as least intrusive as possible. so if you have any additional questions i can --. >> thank you. commissioners, i don't see any questions, comments? commissioner pearlman. >> very small question. what's happening on the south side? >> the south side --. >> is this -- maybe this isn't

for you as an architect. >> historically they were used in the same way so we see this as maybe a 10 year plan, possibly, kind of the set apart module could expand to the south arcade, but that's more long time. >> just wondering why this wasn't one big --. >> commissioner hyland. >> how did the layout of the three or the five kiosks get determined and the rhythm in which they have been placed. >> jane to speak to this, but my understanding is we looked at the arcade and then placed them accordingly so it's kind of corresponds to the size of the arcade bay. >> i guess if you have 25 potential businesses that want them, that might answer the second question. how did you come up with five versus four? >> so they actually mirror the

inside nave shops. if you took a mirror image from humphrey slocum down to mackavoy ranch it's sort of continuing that bow art symmetry. >> these will be connected to those interior --. >> there is that potential. if one of the interior shops would like to open up the doors, like heath ceramics, they have a partnership with blue bottle coffee, oh, maybe heath would want to open up part of their door --. >> that would be the purpose of the doors between the two. >> also with regard to the sizing of the kiosks, i believe one. conditions was the back nave wall remain 50 percent open. so looking at the size of the bay, also with this requirement having a 50 percent back wall opening is kind of

where we ended up with the planning of the layout of the kiosks. >> also as i mentioned the two seating areas, we directed that those be at the north and south end to create this kind of public openness. >> commissioners, seeing no other ques, comments i will open up for public comment. any member of the public wish to speak on this item? >> hello, commissioners, this is desiree smith with the san francisco heritage. heritage did review the project at our issues committee meeting in september and provided some feedback to the project team in october and we're happy that some of our recommendations were included and overall we're very excited about this project. we think it's a great

one and we also hope to see as a model for possible future replication in the south arcade. thank you. >> any other member member of the public wish to speak? seeing none we will close public comment and bring it back to the commission. commissioner hyland. >> i'm in support of the project. i think that the kiosks are well done, i think the design of them will be appropriate, in keeping yet certainly contemporary and distinguishable. the one thought that i had was whether kiosk no. 4 could be slid over so that 3 and 4 were combined. there seems to be a rhythm in the arcade that this interrupts and it creates a little bit of noise behind the arcade that i think it was more symetrical with the layout of the arches and then this, then,

would be mirrored, i would assume, on the south side. so therefore then what's going on behind the arches would have some symmetry to it. the way it's laid out now it seems like there's a discontinent rhythm behind the arches. yeah, just move from the left, 4 so it's adjacent to 3. i think that would serve the program the same way. >> slide 3 over half a bay. >> one and 2 are on center with column line 6. if 3 and 4 are on center with column line 8, then that would create some symmetry. i personally question whether 5 is really appropriate, but i'm sure that it's rentable space so where it's at i guess would be fine. but it is behind the square

arch and we don't really have an elevation that really studies this. the drawings are really nice but the closest to an elevation is the 3-d kind of single point perspective. >> but with no arcade. >> right, and you can't really read how it looks in elevation. that would be my suggestion, i think. i mean i'm okay with 5 but i would suggest that 4 get moved over. >> yeah, the only comment i had was about the rhythm. i agree that the design of the kiosks are beautiful and i think will be a very nice addition to the building and it is a funny thing because you have, you know, the one kiosk that's in the square bay, the squared-off bay which is twice the width of the rhythm of the arched arcade and, you know, it's like a stack caught toe staccato thing. i don't know what the solution is, i don't

know if you move forward 5 over and move 1 and 2 over and make 3 a little bigger, i don't know. >> i think just moving 4 over to 3 would do it. >> then it's sort of funky, sort of hanging off into the arcade that's different. i was just struggling with the patterning and that's why i asked the question about the south. if this were mirrored on the south the same way, then it sort of makes sense because then it is symetrical. >> it doesn't have the same rhythm behind the arches. i don't know if that was studied or if there was an alternative. >> i'm sure, if you've been studying for two years i'm sure you've had alternate designs. >> i guess i'd make the motion of approving it with that recommendation, to move 4 over. >> if i might, on the language

issue. >> we're advising. >> we would recommend that the draft motion be revised so just sort of the very first page, the adoption and findings be revised to read as follows: review findings of compliance with the secretary of sbaer 84 standards for rehabilitation and with article 10 standards for the property located on lots 274 and 275 in assessor's block 2900 waterfront special use district subarea 1 and an 84j height and bulk district. then obviously you can add your recommendation in terms of the location of kiosk 4, in addition to the three recommendations we had for additional review of

construction details. >> would you like to -- so with that motion you are making, right, to the changes miss ovalle just stated and the comments commissioner hyland just stated. >> those conditions of approval then become recommendations. >> yes. >> commissioner johnck. >> i see what you are trying to achieve and i am in synch with it but i would be interested in knowing how this affects the function and use of the plan from the port and/or jane. how does that recommendation, i know it's a recommendation, but how would this affect your economic plan or your business plan? the

objectives for the use of the space. the function, what does this do to you? >> from the port's perspective if the eop is comfortable relocating we think that could work. i'll let them speak to what it does to their business plan and the leasing, but as i said earlier, the port wanted to maintain the two open seating areas and that somewhat influenced how we ended up with this sort of asymetrical layout. >> i think the other thing that we considered is also where we can do core drilling. you know, the building is built on hundreds and hundreds of pilings so there's a limitation of where some of the core drillings can occur but with your comments i think we can go back and look, i think moving 4 over to 3 is a strong possibility. i think we just look at -- i absolutely

understand your concerns about how it doesn't really match some of the symmetry that's so apparent in the ferry building, especially without the south side not having this happen, you know, simultaneously. >> thank you. my comment before we -- are you done? before we move on, my only comment, if we're going for symmetry to me it would be taking 5 and moving it all the way over to 3. however, as a restaurantur i love the extra large seating area toward the middle and activating the promenade because i know when you go by there you see people going in and out except on farmer's market day and the whole middle area feels dead. i actually, even though it may feel a little off because it's so tucked back in there i'm actually happy with the way it is. >> i think we're saying the

same, president hasz. i'm suggesting that 4 slides over so 3 and 4 are on center with column line 8, just like 2 and 3 are on line with column line 6. >> understood. great. and we have a motion, we don't have a second. >> second. >> thank you. >> commissioners, then on the motion to adopt a motion recommending approval with recommendations from staff as well as relocating kiosk 4 to be adjacent to or with kiosk 3, on that motion, commissioner hyland, yes. commissioner johnck, yes. commissioner johns, yes. commissioner matsuda, yes. commissioner pearlman, yes. and president

hasz, yes. that motion passes 6-0. >> seeing no further projects we will adjourn this meeting. (meeting adjourned). .

>> we do. good afternoon. and welcome to our regularly schedule meeting of the joint city and school district and select committee for thursday, october 23rd, my name is