s c of a specifically the proposal includes lower exterior grade of east and west elevations, specifically at the west alley and east light well to provide for new accessible building entrances, lowering of existing doors and installation of new [inaudible] above. installation of one new exterior wheelchair lift at the west exist alley and not at the east light well as outlined in the project discripshz in the ajnda and notice. alteration of existing window opening on roof penthouse and introduction of one new vent and opening and enlargement of a previously approved roof deck by 277 square feet. the roof deck was approved under the previous [inaudible] site visit and

correspondence the [inaudible] rehabilitation and provision of article 10 for the following reasons. the proposal is compatible with the character defining feature thofz land mark building and property, the architectural character will be maintained, the proposed work will not remove damage or destroy original qualities or character of the original historic building. the new wheelchair lift will not attach to the building and be minimally visible from the public and the proposed roof deck ecpansion will have a simple design that is compatible with the building and not visible from the public right away. based on these findings the department recommends approval of the project with the following

conditions, prior to issuance of the architectural addendsm the following requires review by planning department preerfbivation staff. one, samples of base [inaudible] east and west elevation where grade is lowered and 2, final details of the new [inaudible] above new accessible basement entrances. the department received 2 public inquirys for general information about the proposed project one from the san francisco beautiful inquiring about accessible entrance that basement level and the second is regarding how one submits a letter of support for this pauj eblth. the project sponsor is here and prepared a short preezentation of the work and i'm available for questions and this concludes my presentation >> thank you would the project sponsor like to come forward? you have 10 minutes. or less

if you so choose. >> once you start speaking the sfgov will switch to the the slides >> my name is christopher [inaudible] principle for preservation consulting. been working on this project for about 5 years at this point so it is a baby of mine. i'll keep my remarks pretty short because i want to give the project sponsor a chance to work through detail thofz proposed changes to the project originally approved in 2012. [inaudible] is located at 1 jones street at the intersection of jones mu calster and market street. it sits in a c 3 g zoning district and [inaudible] it is also contribute today the midmarket and theater district and city land mark number 130.

[inaudible] designed in 1889 by pices and more [inaudible] it was built in 1892 and located 2 blocks from where the city rr was located and housed law offices of tobeen and tobeen. it was the cities first bozart building and designed 4 years before the 1893 columbian expedition so this building was one of a kind. original 60 by 129 square foot was enlarged in 1905 to cover inentire lot. detail was identical to the original structure. 1906 the building combusted when a quake

came through the area burning the building. the contents of the vault survived and the exterior was undamaged. [inaudible] the bank and tobeen and tobeen muchbed back in in 1907. the bank [inaudible] and the penthouse addition was added in 35. the original certificate of appropriateness was approved december 5, 2012. [inaudible] project rehabilitation the building to meet current life safety and accessibility codes and make it suitable for commercial use including a full seismic upgrade. the proposed changes to had coa include changes made to improve accessibility and also to make change tooz the roof top penthouse which is really not visible from

surrounding streets. with that i'll turn it to nijeal black to tell you more about the project. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is nijeal black and i'm the representative for the project sponsor. i would thrike thank chris and kelly for the time and thunk for the time to present. i'll walk you through the remainder of the presentation looking in more detail not too much fl several items we have on the c och a. the first is lowering of the floor. new ada lift in the west alley and enlarging all the roof deck of the penthouse and window changes to the penthouse. the first slide illustrates the ada access. there are 2 mean tooz the

basement. you can see on the left of the slide it shows the proposed west alley and on the right hand side shows the jones light well and see the [inaudible] lift there also. so, first thing i would like to talk about, the jones street light well. this light well is accessible on jones street. this stair is to remain as it is. the scope is to lower the floor in the light well by appreciately 21 inches and to add 3 concrete risers to make up the difference. there we are-in doing that we lower the light well floor over a short distance and have to rethe existing door and add a new door to close the gap above. lowering the light well will not effect any of the historic

materials and-that are already on the side of the building. we will be exposing the brick vunene below and adding a new cast stone base that will consist of a [inaudible] at the top and a straight face on the cast stone that will match the existing granite in texture and color. it will be in the [inaudible] and the straight plain. just one more note, this slide actually details the ada lift that is shown in the light well. previously approved on the coa. it is now a ada lift and again the purpose here is to get access into had basement from the jones street site. looking now at the next slide, the west alley, the top drawing shows the previously approved west

alley design. what we propose with this application is to lower again the depressed well area in the west alley. we are again similarly to on the jones street side we will excowivate about 2 foot 10 of the depressed well area here and we are going to be exposing some of the brick vu92 near below the existing granite base so we are going to match that back. again the purpose of this is to improve and achieve ada accessibility. we will remove the original door and replace with a compatible steal door with a [inaudible] to close the gap. this slide shows the ada lift to be added on the side. this is minimally visible from the public and building interior. both the ada lift on either side will be not connected to the building, they will be seft supporting and

mostly of steal frame with acrylic or [inaudible] glass panels to decrease the visibility. the next slide here details the west alley door and you can see how the proposed shows a door similar to the original. this shows the west alley and the arrow indicates the door. the next slide on the ajendsa is to expand the roof deck at the pentouz on the roof. the green area is the deck expansion. we are proposing to expand the deck to the west 17 foot 10 and the deck rill not be moved any further south. the line of the deck won't be visible from the street so the deck materials will match those previous

approved in the coa and the gaurdrails. the next slide shows a line of site diagram that shows the view from the opposite block. the [inaudible] hotel looking at the deck. you have to be 420 feet away to see the deck. the southern most line of the deck was approved in the original coa. next we are proposing this slide again shows the expansion thof roof deck to the west on the proposed diagram on the bottom of the slide. what this also shows is the 3 small windows on the-if you look at the lower diagram, 3 windows that are infill windows. so the window changes to the penthouse room is the next item. we are proposing to

lower-there were original changes to the windows and we propose to lower one of the windows on the elevation on the north end and to also add the 3 new windows which you can see on the top slide there. then again the next slide shows the proposed change to the penthouse room and expanding the lobby window and adding a winnow in the [inaudible] and adding a vent grill are for the elevator shaft. these can not be seen from the street right away. the next slide just shows 3 photos which you can review. the windows one on the bottom left shows the interior and the top right shows the window on the right is a exist door and the window on the left is lower today the floor. the

picture on the baultm right shows the east side of the existing penthouse where the new window is to be add today the lobby. i'm basically over time but would like to turn it over to q and a >> thank you very much. i have a question for planning staff. would the previous conditions of approval, the intent-we are adopting a new coa but there were numerous conditions in the previous coa and those are still in tact? >> yes that is correct and we have work would the project sponsor in making sure those conditions have been met >> okay thank you very much. commissioners any questions before we go to public comment? i have a question, the handy cap lift is it open with a railing? it has like a little

door. it was hard to tell what the top of the lift looks like because the pictures in the package had different lefts that were much taller. the section on-the section that you provide on a 15 is quite different than your previous cross section in which you showed the sky light in the lift and in this one the sky light is no longer shown. >> yes >> if you can explain-i couldn't tell what the lift would look like >> absolutely. the jones street east light well was the sky light over the light well which i failed to mention what is included. again, the sky light will shorten the ada lift and on the norlth end of the lith well. the one on the jones street is seft supported-that is like a metal

frame with acrileic or structural panels between to minima lael disrupt the view from behind. a person access from the north end of the light well, there is a small metal platform, they enter the lift and go down to the light well from there >> what you would see is the lift with a railing around it? >> yes at the top both the lifts have open tops so you don't see a shaft way proitudeing or anything protruding above the gaurd rail >> what keep said people from getting on the lift? >> where the original gaurd rail was a gate will be returned at the north end which is where access of the lift is obtained >> thank you very much. any other questions? seeing none we move to public comment.

anybody in the public wish to comment on this item? if so come forward and you'll have 3 minutes. >> hello shelly johnson and i'm a [inaudible] player and i have been [inaudible] highlight the foundations and working with somebody that does foundations and they are kind of tricky, but i think the highlights in the [inaudible] windows and the lift is pretty good on that. it really looks [inaudible] with the windows too. it looks like it is [inaudible] maybe if

they put windows about 2 inches higher it would look like you wouldn't trying to make it a penitentiary. the professional illustration i know they have been looking on highlights of [inaudible] i also think this is [inaudible] the progress is done professional so-on jones

street. jones is the street i live on. i think everything is pretty good though. thank you >> thank you any other member of the public wish to make public comment on this item? >> mr. president and commissioners michael [inaudible] i loved this building every since i became aware of it a lot of years ago and pass by it every day wride thg 5 bus. i was so motivated by this building and actually opened a checking account at hi burnia bank in 1982 and the checks had a pick clr of the building on them and sorry the bank was closed in 1985. it is truly tragic this billings and the old menth have been

inaccessible by the public for so many years and the old mint, don't get me started on that. this building i'm glad the project is going on and looking forward to the aability of the public to see the interior of this amazing building again in the not too distance future. as far as the issues today, i leave it to you to make the right decision in your experience and wisdom. i wanted to raise one fairly small issue which had not [inaudible] discussion back at a hearing i attended at 2011 or 12. that is at the corner othf building just under the dome where it says the hi burnia bank, there was discussion as to whether that modern signage could be removed to expose the name on the granite that said hi burnia savings and loan

society and sure you have seen photographs of how that looked. at the time i atndsed the previous hear there was uncertainty whether it can be done. i would favor restoring the original engraved identification if that is possible so cureier to know if there is further information on that and thank you. >> thank you. any other member of the public wish to speak? seeing and hearing none we'll close public comment and bring it back to the commission. comments? do i have a motion? >> move to approve. >> second. >> commissioners on that motion to approve this matter with conditions commissioner hasz, yes, commissioner johnck yes. jones, yes, matsuda, yes.

hyland, yes. [inaudible] that passes 6 to 07 >> commissioners i did want to recognize kelly wong, this is kelly's last hearing before you. she has been a valued member of the preservation team but she is going off to i think much more exciting endeavor but on behalf of the department especially the preservation team i want to bring this up to you and say publicly we all wish kelly the best in the future and hope to see her soon. >> thank you. >> commissioners item 8. 2015--90-92 second street. this is a nishiation of land mark designation >> good afternoon commissioners

jonathan lamerse department staff. the next case before the commission is to nishiate the perdet building located at 90-92 second street. this is a 2 story brick commercial building constructed between 1903 and 1904 and designed by bliss and [inaudible] the building was placed on the land mark designation program may the 12, 2012. the building

appears eligible for land mark [inaudible] 1906 earthquake and fire. we sometimes forget what a moments event in san francisco history and the most significant event in the cities history. the fire destroyed 500 square blocks and left a quarter million people homeless. the building was unprecedented in the scope. it ranks as one of the worst dejaster izin the history of the u.s. and the burr det building is [inaudible] reduced to ashs, the 2 story brick building remained all most undamaged. within the interity of the burned district it is the only building to survive with contents intact and windows unbroken and not defended from the flames inside or outside the building. it is following the disaster crowds

gathered in front of the [inaudible] astonished. today it is a direct and taskable link to a moment in time. a touch stone when olds san francisco was destroyed and a new city are built. the building has architectural significance of the type and period. there are no other small scale buildings in san francisco that survived the disaster thus the building is significant as commercial construction prior to 1906. it was also a work by nob nub who were one of the most prolific firms in san francisco. 3 san francisco land marks and several other properties listed on the national registry of historic place. the burr det building offers interpretation of the [inaudible] before during and after the fire. located ajaistant to the palace hotel and the call building which then was the tallest

building west of the mississippi and the examer of the call and chronicle. many reporters on hand to take paragraphs and document the movement of the fire. there is nonone public or neighborhood opposition. the department staff reached out to the building owners but haven't received formal notice in support of or in opposition. this conclude my program and happy to answer questions >> commissioners does anyone have questions? commissioner johnck >> jonathan beautiful report and presentation but i guess the question is about the attitude of the owner. do we pursue that? i can't remember whether we have to have official approval or support? >> tim fry detarmt staff.

commissioners owner support is not required as part of the code but we do make ever effort to engage the property owner. before the board of supervisors hearing we would like some sort of written position by the owners and will continue to pursue that up until that time and then to point out this is a nishiation hearing so by the time of the next hearing before this commission, we hope to have something on hand. >> no other questions? thank you. we'll move to public comment. any member of the public wish to comment on this item? seeing and hearing none close public comment and bring it back to the commission >> i move we approve. >> i have a-commissioner hyland has a comment with a little discussion. >> i just wanted to say it was

glad to see oorkt landmark nishiation move forward and thank you for your effortss >> i sucd that motion >> any other discussion? commissioner pearlman >> this was a challenge for me. at some level we look at buildsings for so many reasons and this one has its moment in time, its brush with history as you know the building where maybe a bottle fell off the bar but that was about it and survooived in tact which is pretty remarkable. a lot of that doesn't necessarily have to do with the structure itself, it could have to do the wind or how the earthquake shook so there are lots of reasons why certain things happen. then we look at the significant piece of work for

the architects and this is not a shiny examples. they have done spectacular work in srf. if we look at commercial buildsings, we looked at the rl goldburg building and that was a particularly intact, excellent commercial building of its moment in time and its day and still in tact cht it isn't think this shouldn't be a land mark. i feel there are protections already in place for this building because it is in a conservation district so it is part of the second street new month gumry area and that i think as i mentioned in the last hearing, philadelphia has a plag prac and if we had a prac like that, that is a way within the conservation district we can identify this particular building as being substantial and important because of the fact it did

survive the earthquake. you know as we look at landmarking buildsings, we say to the public, these are the things we think are significant and important to the city of san francisco and we do that with the conservation and historic district so i feel we have kind of done that and the only thing we haven't said is wait, this particular building is important because this is what happened in the 06 earthquake. it just feels very under wellm as a landmark relative to a lot of criteria we usually look at and it may reach a level to be a landmark i'm not sure it is one i get really excited about in terms of so many of the others we are looking at for all the different stories especially when they are cultural stories like the market book store where it wasn't about the architecture either and that was a

interestingical churl story. i'm willing to vote for it, i just wanted to put out that as a thought. >> thank you for your comments. commissioner johns >> thank you. of course it is not a spectacular building, but the entire city before the fire and earthquake was not uniformly spectacular and i do thing that it is worth while to preserve the quite as well as the showy. this is as was pointed out, one of the very few buildings of its type that are left. to me it fact that it survived without help inside our outside is interesting but fairly trivial. but i was empressed that it is a modest building and one of the few