ding 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 a certificate of appropriateness and has a national register with a scope of the work with the terrace plaza and the ground

floor of the facade of the mustard building it includes the following replacement of existing paving with concrete pafrz american people a pedestal system and reposting the lawrence public concrete finish with a 67 inch band of light colored concrete and the corners at the north wall and the planter to reconfigure the planter to committed new walls of the east and south and to install a new concrete bench and new landscaping and reconfigure stairs and to provide new handrails with integrated lighting after the ramps to install and incline list on a railing to replace angle store bays that are from the ground

floor of the mustard building and remove paint of the mustard building and to clad the existing under side of the second-story metal terrace with stucco and to install canvas pursue the staffing finds the recommendation will be in con forms and the concert of interior the work is comparable and clearly dlaechd and replaced the fabric to matching themes and incorporate a new paving system and replace non-historic features and will preserve the historic character of the

location the staff review of the document as noted it ongoing as noted in our case report and draft motion staff recommends several conditions of approval for the finishes of this project subject to the storefront and metal handrails and refer to the updated the document to make sure those teachers features and materials are comparable with the character and fine features of that property staff recommendations condition of approvals rewarding the specifications and review of the make ups of the paint remove from the mustard building and for additional documents of the paving prior to its removal in public comments have been received since packets were summit and the staff recommends approval that concludes my presentation. unless there's questions and the project sponsor is here with a

presentation as well thank you. >> when she starts speaking into the microphone sfgovtv will put up our presentation. >> good afternoon, commissioners aim alicia and the project also part of the design team a jamestown developer and landscaper architect for the storefront at the mustard building daily is the nexus that connects the floor and at the russian

hill and the recreation area and the san francisco bay area, however it has been that in decline and have disrepair the tenant occupancy is 50 percent it's one of the most historical and architecturally significant landmarks the property was acquired by james it up and will receive significant capital investments with the fabric of san francisco that is sensitive improvements that wish the subject character of the property 3 main periods that gives the square the first the construction of the pine hill that was constructed in 1958 percent the chocolate company began in 1953 and in the 19060s with the gardell square it's a

looked and in 19982 was on the register of historic places this is actually, i should - >> this is a site plan that shows the scope of work will occur basically at the terrace plaza and include the storefront replacement of the mustard building and excludes the replacement of the angle storefront enclosures the replacement of incompatible 1484 replacements at the plaza and the reconfiguration of the plaza more comparable with the design and also an navigation of a i think incline lift that allows the public to connect to the plazas in a easier way and the existing pavement to address the water