fenestration proposed by the sponsor comeersions hawse, yes, [inaudible] xhrgzs hiland, yes. president [inaudible] so move commissioner passes 7 to 0. case 2015-004228 def at 235 vulensia street, land mark designation work program as well as 9 b for 2015 [inaudible] 45 on an doga avenue. also marked designation work program >> i would like tapoint out that the person who is submitted the on an daga project isn't able to attend the hearing and asked for a continuous of that item so he can present the findings so we may want to consider that >> if you look commissioner because i don't believe that

gentlemen is here to make that request in person. if you would like to take up that matter of continuous now? >> [inaudible] also another person in support of continuous >> i think we have a motion to continue >> if there is a proposal we should open up to comment on the matter of continuous >> okay. mr. [inaudible] do you want >> just on the matter of continuous >> is there pucklic comment on the continuing on an daga street? seeing none we close public comment and bring back the had the motion. >> i believe commissioner hiland beat you to it

>> [inaudible] very good. on that motion is there any particular date that person was requesting? >> i believe they are available for the next hearing. he didn't indicate >> is that may 6. there are no other items on your calendar for may sex and so i had a brief conversation with preservation coordinator fly and will try to birch your matters a little tighter on your calendar so you done have hearings with just one item. my recommendation is to continue this matter to may 20. >> yes >> very good. on that motion to continue this matter to may 20, commissioner hawse, yes. commissioner [inaudible] so moved motion pass said

unanimously 7 to 0 and leaves you with item 9ax >> thank you. good afternoon jonathan lamers department staff here to talk about 235 vulensia and potential for being added to land mark preservation. [inaudible] february 18 a member of the public [inaudible] present adreport containing historical information about the build{the relationship to hap jones who 62 prominent figure in bay area motorcycleing at that meeting she hoped the stoats code was up great graded to reflect the association with mr. jones and there dealership and the building is eligible as article 10 land mark. single story [inaudible] it was built in 1924 and designed arthur s bugby. it addressed by the

[inaudible] which gave it a california register code of 6 l which means ineligible for local listing but maybe special consideration and planning. the historical information included in the survey form note td nothing about [inaudible] it identified loren jones as the owner but it was silent on the use as the dealership by hap jonesism hap jones came san francisco in the [inaudible] got into the racing and won a motorcycle championship in the 30's and in the 30's [inaudible] 580 vulnsia and 1940 moved into the property. he expanded the business during the 508 after ww 2 he bought surplus military motorcycle parts and created the hap jones distributing

company and puchsed several other buildings around the praurt while continuing to waperate as a dealership. one of the most significant events is hap jones creating the motorcycle blue book like the kelly blook rr boog. it was available to other motorcycle dealership and insurance companies and local mu nis palties and become industry standard. joins continued tomanage the dealership [inaudible] it continued to operate as a dealership until the 1980's. preservation stach conser that the new information in the report by mrs. peden selly does seem to caintd the builds sg associate would a igcouldn't event. the creation thoch motorcycle blue book and hap jones is a figure important to hishry. we recommend that further study address points that the department would like to know more about. one is

relative significance to the dealership. what were the early dealer shs in the san francisco and who operated them and who r there other buildsings that can illustrate this history or is this the best property? we would like to know if this buildsing is sth best way to commemorat hap jones life. in the memo we have questions spelled out that we would thrike see more information about. the xhirgz consider placinging the buildling on the land mark designation program or direct staff or mrs. pedren selly to generate the additional information we asked for. the department can reesess and come back with a recommendation to to whether to add to the program. that concludes my presentation >> thank you. do we have any questions before we take public comment? we'll take public

comment. does anyone wish to speak on this matter? seeing mun close public comment and bring tack to the commission >> i would be interested in knowing more about the particular genre of architecture and arthur bugby as a architect and other gentlemen. and see that additional information would help support a inclusion in the program. i would be in favor of having those questions answered and i think the information about the dealership is interesting and good for further consideration on the land mark program. i think i'm in favor of including it. i think in having those questions [audio cutting in and out] i was impressed by the

[inaudible] >> xhrgzer [inaudible] >> i agree with having the stach or mrs. pedren chely provide more information about the buildsing. i'm not inclined at this moment to put it on the land mark work program for many reasons. one is we have so many there we are not getting close to yet that are still way out and that we done know the answers to some of the questions. the information that is created, discovered will help to make a decision as to whether this is significant in termoffs dealerships and mr. jones life or not because it go the other way and just find that it is one of many that were around at the time >> commissioner hilands >> this is a question for mr. [inaudible] i'm not opposed to

having this placed on the work program, what i would like to support is when we have a member from the community bring forth a project they think is important and would like to be added. the question i have is how this relates to previous land mark designation, the last one, i think the rube goldburg. the member of themunity that brought that project forward did most of inwork to achieve the land marking. if the planning department needs to take this on and allocate resources than i wouldn't have a problem but putting it on the list but it would have to go to the oned the queue. >> completely understood. >> commissioner [inaudible] to give you a refresher or

background. there have been community nishiated or community requests to desinginate property where the commission designated staff to do the research. there have been others like the rube goldburg building where you directed the community members to hire their consultant. it is at your discretion. but if this is a add today the work program and staff is needed for the research it deviated from other things on the list >> i want to note the universesty mound project, the prern in the public that presented it to us presented signed survey of 300 names or something like that from the community, so that spoke to there are a lot of people that care about this. this is one

person bringing this forward and i agree if mrs. petren chely would do the work i would be inclined to yes, let's push it up the list, but otherwise it goes to the end of the list or we just wait until there is more information to decide whether it goes on the list >> commissioner [inaudible] jurkss >> thank you, i would suggest not putting it on the work program at this time. we have stuff on the list that is from landmark preservation. now that we have someone designated we need to peal stuff off there. if the community feels strongly they can get support from the motorcycle community so they can put in the time and effort to raise the fund to get a resource report done. i'm hesitant oo laum stuff on the list that doesn't go anywhere or goes slowly. i think we

have other buildings, one i want to talk about in particular when we get to the next item that i think are more important and more-just hire profile buildings and more significant. i would say-i ask at this moment, it didn't mean we won't put it on the time, but i ask the community of motorcycle enthusiasts to help put funds to it nchlt i'm sure if a community member puts in hours they can gets funds to get it moving >> i would like to request we get furthder nrgz to the questions posed and maybe have that come back to us >> are you speskly asking stach do that or would you like to ask the- >> i would like to ask the community member to get that information and then come back to us, butia gree with commissioner hawse that there are a number of fraujects that

are worthy of immediate consideration that we have not been able to get to for a while >> to be frank it is much easier to review a good report than it is to write a good report >> i want to say just for the record that i love this building. i think it is great, i think if is great oon that block. i love the building, but i also know there are are a lot of other buildings that so community support or something as large as a motorcycle community support so i think we have to concern ourselves with buildings that may not get anyones support that i think are significant. >> i just want to edit my remarks by saying i do expect the proponents to get the answers to the questions. i do want to explain or emphasize

that and acknowledging-my enthusiasm is based as the quhunty comes forward and says we put it on but it go tooz the end of the list. i agree people that are proponents should get the information i think >> do we need a motion on this item? >> there is no formal action here, but i think some consensus for direction to staff would be wise >> what i'm hearing is that the commission would like the proopponent to answer the questions and we are look frg more community support to the projject that we are interested in it but we are not willing at it time to add is to the work program to way down the obligations staff has to the work program. >> i have consensus from the commission. thank you. >> yep. we are closing-we are going to take a short

break. just a very brief break. we have one more item. start the presentation today by providing an upidate on the projectss that have come brrf you followed by the ones expected to come before you in the next few month. we'll go over performance measure squz other projeblth the survey team is working on mpt 3 items were transmitted to the board and placed on hold [inaudible] during the last quarterly report staff committed to 5 nishiation tooz come before you before jul. we believe that goal is still attainable. the 2 items the praes pugoata and sailors union are post poned. when staff met with [inaudible]

draft landmark designation report. [inaudible] june 3rdhering. the department staff met with the #3r5ur79 property owners [inaudible] the university ladies home, the burr det build{ingleside prubestren church are expected to come may 20. in the last quarter the staff held 2 events. [inaudible] registered historic districts and the second event march 25 was cohosted with city wide staff to prevent the find gds of the central somy context statement and historic resourcessurvey. in addition to the land mark designation program also serves

to the historic preservation fund committee. [inaudible] the african american context statement which is expect today come before this commission on june 17. the item was previously expected before you at the last hearing in may, however we would like to post it on the website >> student give the public a 30 day notice to respond to the document. department staff is also currently reviewing the [inaudible] historic context statement and the lgbtq historic state and [inaudible] in the coming month. department staff is also work ogen the clg grant which [inaudible] to better track the status of our article 10 and 11 designation staff established the following performance measures. the first is to prepare a land mark designation rortd within 150 staffer hours. during the reporting quarters

department staff exceeding the number for the swedish hall and [inaudible] 206 hours since the last quarter. performance mexer 2 is prepare a article 10 and 11 designation application, we have done that and the application was completed and upload to the department reb website april 6. performance measure 3 is land mark designation applicant within thurlt calendar day. we received 2 community designation in the quarter. the first is hap jones was for a total of 59 days since you first heard it february 18 until today and the second is 45 [inaudible] which was submitted to department staff [inaudible] staff hasn't been able to accurately track the land mark designation work prac

hours since the transmission to the project tracking system. we are still continuing to work the staff to figure out a way to accurately create a report of those hours. if you have questions about spinge items on the work prm i'm happy to answer them >> any questions? nope. we'll take public comment that time. is there any member of the public have comments on the work program? seeing none we'll close public comment and bring it back thocommission >> and just have h a question about the 3 projects that are pending with land use and transportation. is there a reason for that? >> i think they are on hold. they were submitted and on a 30 day hold and after that i dont think they had been scheduled >> i know the swedish

american haul is planning their party >> as of thireporting quarter they had not been scheduled y. think they were scheduled early this week >> that is correct. the land use committee will hear the swedish american hall monday as well as [inaudible] from what we can gther it was a matter of having a very full calendar, which is what resulted in the delay, but as mr. parks mentioned there is a 30 day sorft rest period for all legislation once it is introduced and that is smck something we have to consider once it moves from this commission to the board of supervisors. it will add another month time >> and the applicant knows that, right? >> that is correct >> any other comment, questions, thoughts about the

work problem? commissioner hiland >> great job again. seriously, that wasn't a joke. i do have 2 questions, one is in relation to thumount of hours versus the bench mark for the new [inaudible] hall and swedish american hall. both of those will have new hours in addition to these. it is hard figuring out how to get something din in the most expedient day. something that has enough rigor to it, but not the perfect job. i just wonder if you had thoughts tim or jonathan about is there a way to streamline the efforts more to try to keep to to the target or is the target too low? >> i take the comment to heart of trying not to make a

perfect report every time, but i good report. i think with swedish american hall it was a function of the interior space. it fs a complex building that had a lot of wonderful interior features that needed to be documented. that added a quite a bit of time with architectural description, but in the end we felt it was worth the time because it is a unique building. nup era hall was [inaudible] and when i came back in did additional research so i think that added hours, but going forward we are much more on target. with the peace bugoata we are well within the 150 hours so that is looking good >> quadon't mean to the minimize your efforts, i think they are really good and the reports are very well done. my question is whether the 150 hour target is appropriate or-just so you are creating a

realistic benchmark so we are not constantly being graded against something that isn't realistic >> have we we done some that met that 150 hour target >> i think when this was established the previous 5 land mark designations had been done within 150 hours >> i think the swedish american hall is hard urbecause of the interior >> i suspect over time you will see some that are 150 hours. the sun shine program has a lot of exterior and interior features so it may run into the same boat with swedish american hall but i think 150 hours is sufficient >> nigh second item related to staff resource squz

encouraging the community to bring forward projects they may want to add to the work program or nish nissiate as a landmark, as the projects prove forward like the goldburg building how much serft it for the staff to facilitate the community land mark? it takes away from the effort of the priorities >> [inaudible] with a community sponsored record >> it all most made the quota jrktss by the time it is done with met the 150 hours >> there are 3 here that look like the reports are done, new era hall [inaudible] what sth status of those? >> the [inaudible] house has been post poned because of

staff availabilityment wub of thsurvey team members is out for a unknown period of time. new era haulm i believe is completed by tim may be able to tell why it hasn't moved forward >> we submit the report to you last fall for your review. we are still working with the property owner who isn't fully in support of land mark designation. we can hear it at any time the commission feels ritz it is worthy of being heard, but we still do periodic out reach to the property owner to see what sort of incentives or benefits we can illustrate to them as part oaf article 10 designation. last la, strand theater as you may know is rehabilitation right now and asked for that project can be

post poned until had rehabilitation is completed and the report is updated and the commission can see the finished project before determining if it is worthy of article 1 designation >> cowl houseer are we waiting for mayor brown to come back? >> i'm in contact with mary brown periodically and i can touch base with her again and we could bring it to you earlier >> i think that-the ownser in support and waiting for it and can sell the house one day and have a different owner. it seems like a good project to bring forward >> i want to speak about the strand theert because the american conservetory theaterer is having the big opening and the owners of inrehabilitation projict are the owners now. i have been a member of that since the begin ogf that, since

bill ball was here in the late 60's. i would think that rehabilitation would be completed or >> it is all most completed >> opening is in about 4 weeks >> it is that soon? >> it is getting close >> it isn't that far off, but i realize staff time too of course, but wanted to acknowledge that >> commissioner hiland >> one last question on the request to the mayors budget for the one full time head count. have we heard anything in response to that? is the mayors office receptive? when will we hear? >> tim fry, detarmt staff, as farb as i know there is no movement. i have submitted the hpc and department request to add a extra body there. we are also asking for a city wide survey manager and that is something we are still

discussing. we'll keep you posted, but the budget will be finalized in august so there is still some time as these numbers get fine tuned and positions get moved around >> any other closing comments on this? no. seeing none i think that is our last item. hearing is adjourned.