a lot of discussion about the result of the variance and therefore what has been proposed for the design even though the there's a direct connection between the two i'd like is the following to some of the arguments made related to size of the building the third-story, the impact on the rear explicit resonate with me in particular instance but going back to the variance itself there are questions in my mind about the finding and the few look at the findings the

first 3 finding especially from more traditional or perhaps more historical analysis of variances and the issues that go into that i don't necessarily agree with the findings perform in particular instance question m in my mind is related to the rest that was thrown in my preservation because that's traditionally it was part of the overall review of a project but one of many factors that led to the review i would disagree with the z a in saying any other solution to this lot would not conform to

the residential guidelines and team i think there are a number of solutions that could satisfy that particular element but satisfy the preservation no and that bother me a little bit in the sense that the ability to take a position which i do want to say this the tail wagging the dog the fact the preservation established every direction for the project i'm not in agreement this is a historical building i think there is nice buildings there expensive buildings but the difference other than a history note between the middle-income over in the sunset or the other does the fact

they're built approximately at the same time nothing special that makes this a historical district but that creates the question mark in my mind because if the 3 findings are not satisfied by the traditional analysis of planning this creates a hardship what preservation has done they are the hardship they created a situation that is so different than what others have had to faced i'm torn about the question of the that enough to sway me in terms of going against the da's determination open the variance or whether i should go iowa i traditionally

think of non-conforming. >> i will try to agree with my fellow commissioner, i think he put it in a way i was trying to put it in i don't necessarily building this property met the variance requirement but after hearing this and going through the belief i think this is a situation that is caused by preservation and so i'm leaning towards approving the variance. >> i'm inclined in that direction as well i don't like this may be someday we hope but if that's the way it is set up it is that's applied uniformly than it has merit to it and again, i'm with you not pursue

swatted the project per say is a problem but that's not what we were here to discuss the meeting of criteria and i think this potential historic district creates issues. >> i agree i believe a lot of the issues were caused by planning specifically. >> i will add one last comment to the commissioners is that i don't think it was applied uniformly across the city i think that in some instances i can probably state those are at some point in time over drinks with the da there are arbitrary capricious decisions.

>> this is the case that's in front of us now. >> sorry to look at this. >> are you going to make a motion commissioner. >> i think i will but i'll lose. >> i'm not sensitive of the finding being valid and therefore i'm going to vote to overturn the variance. >> oh. >> number 1, 2, 3. >> madam president. >> and number 4 and 5 hard to argue that. >> we have a motion on the floor from commissioner fung to overturn the zoning

administrator overrule the granting of the variance on the basis that finding 1, 2, 3 have not been met. >> on that motion to overrule commissioner president lazarus no commissioner vice president honda. >> no commissioner wilson is absent thank you. the vote is 1 to 2 the motion fails, the granting of this variance is upheld. >> i have no other motions. >> okay with no other motion commissioners there's no further business. we're written director's

report the prototype plan we have convened with the yerba buena for the arts and the james arts foundation that is funding that this week we'll be 45 installations of plans on market street to prototype a different way of using artists and

arithmetic and getting national and a, in fact international attendance it is very interesting we at the present time, a lot of people in town to look at what we can do for market those are temporary but prototypes for future installation under from the 9th through the 11 a website that's attached to our website it is linked you'll see a number of events happening that does that for me thank you. >> commissioners item 2 review of past events. >> good afternoon tim frye a couple of items this week first of all guarantee joe i don't have a form report but a couple of items one was last week, we held a mills act workshop within

the tenderloin register district we had eleven property owners there i think about thirty members of the public attended in general the assessor records office was there and answered questions under the mills act and definitely interest in procuring applications we targeted the up down district and the lower knob hill the register go district so we'll continue to work with the applicants interested in applying this year and also scheduling a miles actress workshop in the dog patch lower and we'll keep you posted we also last week presented the draft survey for the central

selma plan survey finding were presented by the survey team and our office there is a google map that's posted online as well as the contract statement new buildings on the landmark designation and number of buildings to list on reclarify under the article 11 of the planning code those will be incorporated into the plan and the survey and contact statement will reach you sometime late this year or early next week that is available online and happy to forward it to you. >> and lastly as a followup to our last hearing the cultural assets hearing the staff went to

the small business commission to represent the hpc and the department and their discussions about the legacy business register they were - they have agendized discussing criteria and administration around the registry and another item open their calendar that took quite a bit of time and didn't have enough time we reiterated our willingness to assist and provide technical assistance to the commission in developing the registry and overseeing the registry as well as the historic preservation commissions interest so we'll continue to attend their hearing and keep you posted on their developments that concludes my comments. >> commissioners seeing no questions portsz and

unanimously. >> no one. >> the draft minutes for the ar c meeting the draft minutes for excuse me. the kushlt heritage committee meeting for march 18 and the minutes for the regular historic preservation commission meeting. >> commissioners any comments or corrections or restrictions seeing none, we'll opening it up for public comment does anyone wish to comment on the historic preservation commission or the regular historic preservation commission meeting seeing none we'll close. i move the 3 minutes be approved >> second. >> thank you, commissioner on that motion to adopt the minutes president hasz commissioner richards commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman and

commissioner hyland and commissioner wolfram so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously and places you on item 5. >> commissioner pearlman i wanted to tell you about a project i'm involved in if the market street festive that is detour.org a group that creates fascinating and walking tours from an hour to half an hour i'm the in their for and it's very cool and they're interesting so if you go to detour.com they have proved and bringing it to you so thank you. >> is commissioner richards i'm

curious about the norman clay sign some question that was being taken down without a prior notice so didn't have a whole lot of information we got. >> an e-mail from a neighbor. >> right. >> or tenant. >> commissioners tim frye the removal of that sign was from a signage to alternate it was approved through our office the sign while it was a no on sign it was moved identity building so under the revised signage program because that sign explicit meet our current guidelines it sign was removed and new sign was installed that meets our good morning, supervisors. >> commissioner hyland.

>> i want to say the closing the san francisco at the end of the month i'm saddened yet another legacy business is you know for me has been a huge resource so - >> sad to see them go. >> any other questions? >> no. >> commissioners commissioners that places you under your regular calendar for item 6 case 2014 - 00 one c a on samson street a certificate of appropriateness. >> good afternoon before you is a request for the certificate of appropriation for the street which is contributing to the waterfront district originally constructed in 106 by an unknown

architect as an industrial 4 story facility the work for daudz facade altercations for replacement ever non-historic windows with new aluminum windows are a configuration based on historic plan remove of original concrete packaged on the second to figure out floor on the windows in the opening and replacement of non-metal and installation of new storefront in existing roll up doors and concrete in fill and removal of the floor height and installation within the new openings of storefront and the windows on the upper floor and existing concrete pagd will be

restored as panels are replaced and accident facade will be repeated that that are staff finds the condition will be in koorngs with article 10 and the rehabilitation the project will replace incomparable windows and convert new comparable windows and storefront oscar pistorius and have other materials in comparison with the other district several issues of approval for the clarifications or a mock ups for the reconstruction and paint covers and further staff recommendations the existing concrete panels prior to the removals but installed in the same was in order to delineate those windows and for former loading dock bay to be retained

in a different configuration again talent that from existing window oscar pistorius and in public comment was received since the packet was implemented and this is for approval with conditions that concludes my presentation. and the property owner as well as the architect are here as well thank you. >> does the property owner have a presentation or - >> it's not required but if you have anything. >> actually, we have keith with no formal presentation happy to answer questions and the developer is here if you have particular questions. >> commissioners before we do public comment do you have questions for the applicant? staff >> i have a question. >> commissioner johnck. >> so some questions of the are incorporation of inclusion of

the plaques being done isle i'd be interested it is existing to see this work. >> there's no discussion. >> to that is something i'll be interested in i'd like to support that idea if it's okay with the architect and owner. >> any other questions? i have one question did - was this scenario looked at in which there was no divisions westbound the windows that were placed with blank panels so they're more similar if you look at it in pure elevation similar to that if the panels were there >> i think the feeling since the materials was being removed we want to make sure the windows were as comparable as possible with the characterization of the

building so i think we might have a question about a single pain being as compatible but it will further delineate those being new or different. >> thank you. is there members of the public on this item? is seeing and hearing none public comment is closed. and back to you, commissioners. >> commissioners. >> comments thoughts. >> i'd be interested if you would support of the inclusion of the addition of the historic plaque on the building would this go e be something that's appropriate at this time? >> commissioners tim frye department staff as a matter of consistency this was something that was asked for from the

earner waterfront i can't recall the address do you remember the ar g project. >> nooifr we did it at the battery street and they were prospering that part of that proposal was an interpreter active plaque that was their own k50rd and ethics commission it got approved. >> it looks at great. >> yeah. i walk there all the time i'd be interested in keeping up with the art plaques there in that area. >> commissioner johns and i wanted to ask what kind of a plaque did you have in mind what do you think is appropriate for that location and that particular building? >> well, the size of the plaque

at 901 battery there's another one on stanford but know maybe a foot to - it's small but it has enough color and the font and writing just a couple of sentences about the history of the building this is a 1901 i think; right? >> it was after the 1906. >> the size of the building is massive i would think there is one of the blocks that holed up a small sign whatever there maybe some other ideas of materials i don't have any specifications in murder in the first degree. >> commissioner pearlman. >> there's a big difference between interpretative display

and a plaque plaque is not expensive and the interpretative display is more. >> i'm thinking of a plaque correct. >> do i have a motion. >> motion to exclude that as a condition. >> all right. did you make the motion diane. >> did the motion include the plaque. >> additionally. >> very good commissioners, i have a there is a motion and a second with conditions amended to include a plaque on the building. >> interpretive plaque on the exterior right. >> an interpreter active plaque on the external on that motion president hasz. >> commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman

commissioner hyland and commissioner wolfram so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero that concludes our hearing the hearing is adjourned

test. >> good afternoon, everyone the mocking i'd like to welcome you to accident regularly scheduled meeting of land use commission i'm supervisor cowen and to my right is vice chair supervisor mike wasserman and supervisor wiener will be joining us shortly the lovely and talented any andrea ashbury i'm to recognize jonathan and charles kremenak that will be tele