comment we'll close public comment and bring it back to sxhaem. >> actually, i thank katherine howard i noted landscape when i was going owe over this last time this critical a particularly with park merced that's an obvious one i thank her for that number of we're hoping about the retention i'm not how you demonstrate it something does or does not improve the overall project one commissioner johns remind me of the 1821 bush where the entire building behind the facade is an

unfinished building the project restored the facade to have that wonderful building as a resource i believe it's anothers landmark building so that's the case where it is fairly simple to say the facade retention alone would enhance the overall project i think another one that came up was the 1 on pine street to the east of van ness he forgot the fabulous but on the south side of the street the auto repair and what's that. >> two projects one on. >> to the east where you have a modern building a that's 12 stories and we had that little facade and saving that facade seems odd relative to that building that seems odd but again bout is in the eye of the

beholder it's a hard thing to quantify if i something that's non-quantifyable something that looks at good i'm not sure how to do this i don't know if it is something that's reviewed at the aa r.c. in that the process but, of course not happening at that time coming though the eir process not coming to us until after the act it's hard to understand how to quantify if any, that the notice of precipitation i'm wording in the process we can be notified there's a notice of precipitation on the project that provides the historic resource we can be involved in the early stage where we are reminded that's where the alternatives get developed i think in this case we might have

an opportunity to make suggestions how to save the historic resource in an alternative it is not we're getting to it when it's done the departments has made the decisions a about the alternative and come back and say if you certified the facade it would have been fine that's hard to make those kind of changes if we have notification of the notification precipitation i think we get some information but if it were publicly announced perhaps in comments somehow we know this one involves historic resources and the possible impacts because we're all very busy unless it's in the packet i may not have the time to spend the time but if

the department knows it's significant and has an impact that gives us the impact to take a look at it it now this will help to resolve the design issues and if i may think this because whether we don't want to see do you're saying having folks rely on us outside the chambers that's a tough route i'd love it if we have photo examples of projects around town okay. this was a true demo it worked for this building and give reasons where it worked i know that pine street not garage one but behind holder that's an example i mean the architecture digest is going to have an example there were reasons he

didn't like it like pros and cons of a voting ballet of what works and what does i personally wouldn't want to get involved i want to say here's what we the in the past you guys digest it and come up with alternatives that's a little bit longer process then ear doing today; right? like who put that package together >> if i may interject commissioners just a couple of short comments one for the purposes of that policy it is appropriate to strike the last sentence that we see something appropriate maybe appropriate on

a case by case basis excuse me. least it at that the first sentence of the photograph at least it's providing clarification on the policy and then to follow up on president hasz and commissioner pearlman's comments staff does kooths bring larger projects that have a historic preservation to the design for feedback during the notice preparedness we bring those to the commissioner meetings are the president and vice president and give them a hides up those are coming down the pipeline those are the effective way to give the commission and heads up it is working very well and i'll recommend that we certainly put

for information into our coordinates folder to give all the commissioners a heads up that way if the f r.c. feels strongly something needs to be heard we can end up you know providing a better project at the end of the day to get that fenway earlier rather than at the end during the comment period so a quick one on the specifics 350 bush was that considered demo a major portion as we say - >> the room was a significant portion of the building is being saved. >> reconstructed. >> it has a sort of a strange history because the entitlements have been actually since the 1 todd's and how much of that

building can be removed definitely not the normal project. >> so we don't use that one for example (laughter). >> commissioner johns. >> two things number one mr. frooir fry you mentioned removing the last photograph of number 6 but you might also look at the second sentence of following photograph that is where it is deemed it improves the project. >> correct. >> the other thing of excluding the landscapes germany think i'm flavor of that bus it's a slippery slope particularly when the landscapes are also subject and will in fact are designed to be changed and the best example of that is golden gate park i certainly

would never be in favor of anything which would burden the gardeners in golden gate park where the rec and park we have to justify changing the colors of the b.a. gondz or substituting one kind of flower for another there's no firm time when that ends but in the case of parks changing the landscaping is one of the things that is implicit in changing the parks we must be careful where does that end and it become say changing the turf at the western borderer of golden gate park and went through that through that battle and it is still going on

so i we have to give very careful consideration to this term landscape to mayor we know exactly what it is or well, probably couldn't do it exactly but to the greater stent possible if we say landscaping on a macro level that's one thing but come a point when i think that we are defeating ourselves. >> commissioner hyland. >> i think that we're looking at projects that have been determined to have significant combats to require a dr so i feel comfortable using landscape there if it requires an eir because it's the only flower 34

the word that should be preserved but that didn't exclude the word landscape that little detail. >> commissioner hyland. >> yeah, so to that point actually, i that what's important to remind everyone why we wanted to bring this forward and this is those are projects that potentially the property owner is looking to depiction 9 building we're asked to review the craft eir that has one page as the preservation alternative that's not - it's a waste of our time quite honestly so i'm very supportive of this and i think the point is we need more information we need a presentation of the thought behind the preservation alternative and we need the

intent to have a discussion about that in my mind that's the primary purpose of the resolution facadeism i wasn't going to do that (laughter) this notion of the facade retention i wasn't familiar with 188 g bushy looked at on the golden maps i think the facade the vertical conditions and i don't know where this line is drawn from what i see from 1881 i think that project meets the standards with the horizon editions and the rear edition so if it meets the standards than the mitigation was less than significant so we wouldn't be concerned about the project

i personally have yet to see a vertical edition to a building that has retained the facade that i find worthy of going through that mess those projects give preservation a bad name we're being forced to keep it crap facade it's not the facade that is important it's the space behind the facade in my opinion the way in which we integrate those the entry of the ground floor space into the new design is that what is really important i think i don't have the exact language but i propose we include in item 6 on the second photograph but we can demonstrate it and improve the

overall ground floor space that contributes to the significance of that facade because otherwise there's no reason to keep it so. >> well, you're saying ground floor space let's take the pine street behind the other one they didn't build behind the building inspection only the facade was kept i'm trying to understand. >> there was another building; right? so the space and the one hundred and 10 foot deep auto shop is what makes that building significant now based on acceptable you know alternatives we can keep 10 or thirty feet but if we change that and keep the facade no one will

understand what happened behind the facade so the ability to incorporate that into the loading zone on that was a multi story building. >> in the interests of the recess. >> there's a recess piece of it. >> so incorporating it into the design we're keeping it i mean i don't want to be that explicit but it's one of the proposed examples. >> i have a slightly different take on it you know there are historic resources that or landmark buildings or historic landmark resources that are known for events that happened there i worked on the one that the names memorial quilt was there the building itself once again the building the spates behind it really is not significant to the fact of what

happened in that particular place that's a hard one relative to pine street where one of the buildings was a ate row for a short term and furniture store for most of its life therefore it's not an automobile building but the sign says so but that wasn't one it's hard to grasp this one i agree with you there is a facade building on fulsome street between 9th and 10th a protecting housing below market rate housing building a red brick facade that looks at paved into a modern apartment that building behind that i agree it is not exactly what i consider

the finest of architecture for our city it's a fine line between how much we define it and mr. fry said about the case by case basis where we get into the specifics of what makes sense relative to whato is what is the impact and the showroom itself is critical that's important to that particular project but may not be an overall part of a policy i think we're really getting very refined and detailed where policies should stay. >> you know in going back to what commissioner hyland said let's go back and think about the purpose. >> the information if the alternative. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> so i think what wear saying

it's been done people know it's been done we're saying this could come flofthin front of us and be approved. >> commissioner pearlman. >> i think the 5 m project was a good example of again why we want to have this policy because you know that was a massive project it is a massive project we got is a couple of weeks before there were like 5 historic resources and the staff it wasn't a presentation of the alternatives or any of that i really enclosure the part it is presented and there's a much broader public presentation of what the historic preservation are so the public knows and give

us more of a time and an easier way to comment on. >> commissioner johns. >> thank you commissioner hyland made an interesting observation that about the buildings on the pine street i think you said one of the important parts those are extremely deep lots and it occurred to me that maybe and there were instances when it is not very important that they were deep lots or what went on behind them but what's important the facade because it in some cases would suggest the character the touch and the feeling of the neighborhood which is no longer with us and i can envision instances where it might be highly desirable to keep those things for that reason it is similar to

a ideas of straights so keeping in mind what you mentioned about why we're going into this experience i think i also want to point out there's this other aspect to maintaining facades that i don't want to - >> commissioner wolfram. >> i have a question for staff when the planning commission states of an eir their certifying the design and the appearance of a project are they like the way the deems looks at or other spakdz of that are we mixing up something that's not related to an eir but more to the design of the project. >> that's correct commissioners generally a certification of an eir is fold by the entitlement it go into much more detail

about the design detail what you're referring to. >> for the facade retention in a way didn't relate it will have a significant impact not in terms of the significant impacts it is the same as a non-preservation alternative and more of a design issue that doesn't relate to the eir at all but relates to the design that is more input from the staff and wondering whether we think about the policy is a separate policy document that we set back to the planning department regarding the approval of the projects that have integrated our opinion about it whether or not there's this thing about the facade because it is not a historic resource the sponsor can decide i did not

want to keep the defrauding facade it has no virtual preservation it can have a facade but it didn't workout so its not lessening the environmental review. >> commissioners one thing i'm hearing based on our previous conversation about eir the department will be for removing this section the reason we excluded it was based on comments this commission has made about basically inadequate alternatives having the policy outlined will address the issue of the facade retention by having the policy we will be able to get project sponsors

that up front information weer expecting well flushed out and well-thought-out preservation preservation 90 percent of those include project retention it maybe redundant to call it awe out as a design issue not a ceqa issue just food for thought. >> on the facade retention 24 was specific because we confusion your demonstrating the building they heard demo so; right? a that's basically what that was there for a theory behind let me know up front

because it says demo officially didn't mean you taking up 9 whole thing a that's where that came from any know. >> commissioner hyland. >> prepping for this hearing i was concerned about the implicit approval of the project on fulsome when i a.d. horror when i drive by it i haven't seen the final design but the pine street project on the east side the planning commission actually encouraged the retention of the facade and has stated they think it improves the entire facade of the project i believe that was

the report back from the that's the east side i'm sorry west side the one down. >> it is east of van ness. >> yeah. >> south side of - >> they were not planning on retaining. >> they have a massing that's a similar scale of the historic - >> the point is that conversation that process provided a design that was more in keeping with the neighborhood ; right? so i don't know if that i guess i'm mixed up at this point. >> without it that exploration doesn't happen. >> no, it doesn't happen and to commissioner johnss point why i lean towards saving something like on one of the m 5 project

what is the character of that block if you go pine street the one on the west side one or two are saved and go across the street to it tower it overwhelms you and have anything saved hey those are only one stories that's why yeah. something that better than nothing. >> yeah. i want to raise an order about this discussion i think we should continue the discussion and hold even though hearing on the certificate the applicant is waiting to hear and or but i think or continue after that but my overall sense is maybe this policy that is an important discussion we need to definitely continue this but an area this should be removed over

and over the architecture heritage made recommendations, too, and i think my point of order to hold this discussion or continue it afterwards or have the staff bring back a new resolution i have marks all over this thing i'm not necessarily ready to approve it. >> we have a completely revised copy so the pun has not seen it. >> i move we continue this to the next hearing. >> and would we direct staff to include the landscape as well as the recommendations from heritage i find them all acceptable. >> certainly. >> and change the - >> the comments we made about clarifying the language. >> commissioner hyland will be gone at the next meeting and how

about the 118 of the which march. >> commissioners, i know it is probably too much to ask would you like to see the facade retention section revised or taken out of the polygamy direction will be appreciated. >> we'll have it left as is that's why we're having a meeting. >> we discussed some of the reasons to clarify it if it were to stay in (laughter). >> and we'll discuss whether or not to get rid of it (laughter). >> i love doing things twice. >> then one point of clarification on the edits commissioner hyland made a comment about excluding an exploration of the ground floor space is that an idiot the

commission wants to include. >> that's too much detail we're going to chop that section. >> a little bit more surgery. >> but this would be then useful in other forms so you don't know i don't think it will be waste. >> i want the exploration of what makes the facade important we can have a debate of that that is including it as a facade but the point is establishing the importance of the fade. >> right. >> not detailing specification in a policy state; right? >> okay. >> we'll include it in the discussion. >> so we have a motion on the floor and second. >> thank you commissioners on that motion to continue this matter until march 4 or 18th okay. >> on that motion to continue

this matter to march 18 commissioner hyland arrest 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 7 excuse me. for case no. 2014 a at gardell jury this is a certificate of appropriateness. >> i have a disclosure the firm i work for has completed relevance a different work on gardell square and looking for the same owner and talked with the attorney i need to recuse myself if it's not the same project. >> thank you good afternoon, commissioners for the department staff