going to just stay with them for life. ♪ test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test test >> i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president wolfram commissioner hyland commissioner hasz commissioner johnck commissioner johns ask commissioner matsuda and we expect commissioner pearlman to be absent today commissioners, the first item on your agenda is general public comment at this time, members of the public may address the commission to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be

afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. i have no speaker cards. >> does any public comment wish to address the commission on non-agenda decided amends interest seeing and hearing none public comment is closed. >> under department matters director's announcements. >> commission tim frye the director's report was included there our packet happy to we are any questions should you have them. >> seeing none, commissioners we can move to item 2 past fence amazements. >> good morning tim frye department staff a few items to sharing share last week the board of appeals heard the brt

certificate of appropriateness issued by in commission no november and the board of appeals heard from the appellant as well as mta and the planning department staff on behalf of the hpc the board of appeals had a number of questions as you recall the appeal around the removal of the trolley poles and also the removal of trees as part of project the board of appeals did raise concerns about the removal of all the trolley poles and the line of questioning was towards the direction of wanting to save more but the board of appeals felt that this commission decision in asking mta to retain 4 was appropriate and defers to

you on this matter the board of appeals also had a number of questions why the trees were had to be removed however, mta did talk at one point about the number of trees and the fact there will be more trees replanted in this area after completion of project so we have a quorum the board votes 3 to one to deny the appeals to the commission is upheld in this case and as you may know the mta will be coming back to you within 6 possess to discuss the redesign the bus short term and have a panning plan how to rehabilitate those trolley poles there was a lot of discussion at that previous hearing two other items more updates one to remind you the cal house is still pend at the

board of supervisors with the new year and some discussions with the supervisor were seeking sponsorship of that to move forward to the land use committee the supervisor of that district is interested in a site tour we are trying to arrange the site tour prior to any further discussion and second in 90 second street the board and building is pending another the board of supervisors and again, we're working with the specifies office in this district to seek sponsorship and more information hopefully at the next hearing that conclude any announcements for you unless you have additional questions thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, that places

you under your amazements you no announcements. >> considerations of the draft minutes for 2016-2017 excuse me. >> any comments of the minutes does any wish inform comment on the deficit of 2016-2017 not seeing any, do i have a motion to adopt. >> move we adopt the makes sense thank you commissioners on that motion for january 6th commissioner hasz commissioner johnck uncommon commissioner matsuda commissioner hyland and commissioner president wolfram so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero commissioners that place us on commission questions or comments. >> are there any dollars commissioner johns. >> job have a disclosure i've become quite interested in the magnum the building the latter

of two located on the south west corner of stockton and geary i learned today didn't seem to be protected other than in a district i think that was started in so 03 or 5 rather and rebuilt after the fire and earthquake and then the substantial totally removed by timothy in the late 40s i think we should address appropriately designating that can so that it can be preserved and not filled filled he will with in the future. >> commissioner johnck. >> i want to let the commission know it a great educational experience with the stone foundation an international foundation stone nation they carbon dioxide a

series of lectures at the museum regarding the series of stone in the san francisco landscape we studied it 1847 is anyone imagines what it is on corner of montgomery it was a hotel built by mr. par even though in 1857 i thought perhaps 4 point might have been something but the next, we studied the u.s. knit as well as the james shred building a great lectures on texture and how stone with the power of stone and the landscape and as we concerned the public realm here today, i think that is very timely to think about stones so i learned a lot and

met a lot of great stonemason sons i let the commissioners know about that anytime we have future discussions on stone i'm an expert. >> commissioner hyland. >> for all ellen and i and commissioner johns on the waterfront plan update working group and we had our second meeting last week it was just the general overview of the entities that will be coordinating are bcdc and state lands the port of san francisco, planning department and a few others nothing to report on that but the mergers are continuing we'll give updates as appropriate second thing i've spoken to supervisor campos office as well as supervisor peskin office

about the agendized the legacy registry fund and lastly recusing myself on the regular item episcopal my former firmer. >> thank you. i have one disclosure i spoke today, today with lacey if the trinity church. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move on to item 6 election of officers. >> this can be had believed a variety of ways generally, we receive the nomination and consider the nominations in the order you receive them. >> commissioner johns. >> well, i nominate our present officer to continue for an additional term that is commissioner president wolfram as president and commissioner

hyland as the vice president. >> second. >> thank you any other nominations or do we need to take public comment. >> we should are there any public comment on the election of officers seeing none, and hearing nun back to you, commissioners. >> sounds like we have a motion and fwlrs a motion seconded to nominate commissioner president wolfram as president and commissioner hyland as vice president commissioner hasz commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner hyland and commissioner president wolfram so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and congratulations to the both of you. >> i wonder if i can appoint two committees the architecture all called review.

>> review committee. >> what's that r stand for the review and the cultural committee i'd like to appoint to the architectural review economy commissioner hasz and commissioner pearlman and commissioner hyland and . >> commissioner president wolfram will be remain as the "x" off so we generally appoint four 4 members 3 in the case their numbers are not called excuse me. very good. >> very good commissioners public school commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move on to the regular calendar i don't see director rahaim in the audience if you want to introduce the work program and budget to you so if it is all right with the commission we'll

call item 8 out of order to allow him time. >> very good. >> calling item 8 out of order for case at 16g 68 bush street a certificate of appropriateness and commissioner hyland and we need a motion to recuse commissioner hyland. >> thank you on the recusal of commissioner hyland from item 8 commissioner hasz commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner hyland and commissioner president wolfram so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero good afternoon, commissioners tiffany department staff the application a request for as cops to enact building upgrades added triage episcopal church if

i could have the screen located in the western edition neighborhood at the sgrshgs of bush and golf street the subject property is logged on on approximately 17 thousand square feet lot in a r four district the down slope to the east resulting in a released basement continue at the rear the lot in close proximity to an adjacent office building it was designed in 1893 by arthur page brown with the architecture remedy as an that is referred to as norman revival clad in a stone and the roofline has towers and orient mental stock exchange with the arched wails have an art class

with these windows the main church structure is separated from the north wing by a courtyard it opens up to golf streets the courtyard is a primarily entrance with 3 points of entry to the building attribute was designated as an individual to a landmark in 74 for one and 20 years for home for 19peter's and this consists of reroofing all the surfaces to match the memory before an with the shishlgz and the maintenance of the interior exterior sandstone i'm sure the project

architect will talk about the blocks with the vetting plans vertical so the delast names occurring in parts of the this the masonry will be cleaned in the area bilingual growth and where needed with an appropriate line order replacements on non-oriented windows to wood elements and exterior repainting are proposed no work is proposed for the figurative art class windows in the church two new egress stores with proposed at the rear the property the first requires a new left opening within the rear waltz seen on the churches north wing the east elevation of the church property on existing

parking pad a new metal stair will be down to grade level the is it correct new egress will say located at the rear the property from the basement area currently used as the social haul it is be created by dropping the windowsills to create a lower threshold images of the interior not subject i subjected to proposal are included to describe the overall purpose saeblth upgrades it the inner series of a restroom off the north wing this photo shows the sliding pocket doors had or that will retained and fixed within an open position in the cavity above a new ramp will be added

at the surveillance this is irreversible not attached to the buildings the size of the program for the building proposed to strengthen the undporsz by 6 vertical concrete within the south wall and through the use of concrete share walls in 5 areas of main floor indicated on this plan. >> vertical coerce are proposed non-drilling to prevent damage to the non-restricted stained wall it was designed with flat finishes that can be easily replicated are doors fixed in place to hide did sheer walls

behind them the front is proposed to be strengthened along the north wall by adding a sheer wall that converts an existing double door to a single arced door residence staff has demonstrated with the recommended proposed work is in xhoofrps with the secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation the exterior work and the seismic reimbursement is to be conducted in a manner that is conducive to the building the project provides greater access to the entire through the reserveable a ramp like the sanctuary and courtyard with new he regress stores on areas the rear elevation that are of visible materials and schematic

upgrades with the sheer walls designed into locations to minimize mayor public viability this has a proposal to stabilize the north wall the church in a location that is outside of the main sanctuary but still on a pubically visible portion the sponsors preferred designs that the screen here would maintain a pact of circulation at the north wall by incorporating a rough oh, my god with an arced door designed to be comparable with the hectic building the new areas of concrete surrounding did replacement door will be finished that in a cone finish to match the sandstone the disadvantageous with this promoted destine it result in is

also of historic fabric there the removal of double doors and reduce the historic left opening requiring a greater captains of visual in fill material and results if a noticeable altercation on a area the landmark building that has high viability from the street by craft the design proposal for the north share wall will retain the doors in a different length staff feels this will result in a more subtle change with the existing double door configuration that is consistent with the golf street and the side door return would reduce the amount of in fill materials had been required around the reinsult double dota

doors - that will not please be advised assess from the other 3 functioning doors on the west wall based on this analysis staff recommends approval with the following conditions the sponsor have pursue the additional designs for the sheer walls for the historic double doors or doors to minimize the alteration with hi public viability and two the project architect will work with the staff to make sure the sheer are partially on the interior on the north wall possible to minimize the exterior walls and retain as much the exterior sandstone and feasible and to avoid obstructing historic building

fabric ♪ location since the commission pact were directed or distributed the department has received two letters and one of these should have been forward by e-mail and the other i print her per for the members of the commission lacey with ar g is here toy provide additional background as well others members of the team in ar g and the background user background of the proposal that that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions >> thank you so project sponsor come down we have 10 minutes for our remarks focus on the areas of questions.

>> thank you. good afternoon. i'm atlantic ocean i didn't and here representing architectural resources group we've been working with the trinity st. peter's since 2011 and happy to be here and present this project with an economic schematic strengthening design alyssa gave you a great overview but ask questions if you want clarification background about the building and the schematic design and conclude with the clarification about the proposed in fill at the north wall of the project combbld due to concerns for

safety by the school diocese the services have not yielded been held within 5 historic sanctuary since 2010 at the moment, no events are permitted inside the sanctuary they will this is complete that project has been pushed forward a small con congregation with limit support if the disexcess - from long time people and arthur page and brown assumed that may not be

the case unfortunately original drawings no longer exit 0 but how task at the residential design team and thankfully we identified the extremely sesteel reimbursement inside the building you'll see the steel cast iron and portions the ceiling and side walls we revealed steel beams that appear to be and this picture right here an enormous column resting often others granite foundation moving up the building with the steel towers as you can see we found a embedded in the golf student sie building we believe that the 4 corners of tower are

support by the pilars and finally concerned how the large masonry building was support on all four sides we cut an opening in the roof and identified steel columns at the four towers you'll see in the photos a prospective of those steel beams it to investigation allows us to look at the retrofit and reduce the impact and ultimately reduce the construction costs by more than half this lout the project to move forward with that in support and that brings me to the detail at question at the north wall of the decks the only detail to be seen inside the

kwrgd courtyard it is difficult to see the angles here you'll if you are looking at deregulation into the courtyard it is directly on the right as discussed planning want to see we designed this detail as proposed this specific location requires the intervention due to the wall length outside the door opening as you can see we have less than it feet of it is holdings up the full masonry above it to not possible to move the details to another opening your proposed detail sets a sheer wall off the exterior and interior of the bays a two inch reveal from the outside own knowledge edge the opening and a

flat wall we'll finish with plaster and aged wall referencing the detail immediately framed a new wall opening a single arched door at the building the detail was specifically designed to retain the use of opening of the door for circulations and egging regress the door in question is for the building and frequently used today a number of reasons that door is important include at the primary don't worry about as golf street those are assessed stairs in an example the number of stairs as you see those doors have stairs although not the official assessable entrance to the building this door is used for this for people unable to crimp and security

reasons not desirable to open all the main doors facing golf street during events this door is a primary entrance and for security reasons this security gate as you can see are with typically closed with the building is not in use this leaves the courtyard with the path of circulation between the building compose not a strong entry and circulation pact path the go or building is not only used by the congregation but all who want to benefit the community and the circulation path for community events and church events finally at the such a large area of assembly outside the congregation we are uncomfortable eliminating a path completely alls reasons with we prioritize

the design includes a door opening and investigated some alternatives it was rejected he will early in the design we studied push did concretes wall further into the building adding a foundation that effects the interior and requires expensive excavation work below important cost reasons we're on the final detail we feel when looking at the official artificial strengthening the complex and numerous masonry we have the the impacts and the storm is a minor impact to the building the overall construction to the character in summary we'll to talk about the leaving the door

this is a building not a fade and after the small location has struggled within in their bucket we don't want to restrict their finally able to move back in i want to leave with the original rendering for the building that was published in november 18, '84 in the american architect the congregation has been an credential steward and for the past 20 years are eager to have the main sanitary attorney-client thank you for your time. >> colleagues new questions. >> is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak on item number if i wish to please come forward and have 3 minutes and warning bell at 30 seconds. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm patricia cunningham i'm the person in charge at the church we're

talking about trinity 19peter's episcopal church, i have i am grateful to be here to speak future and grateful for the city planners where you have the plans that is favorable for us one exception being the north space at the north x in fill as you've heard from over architect that that door is frequently used in the functions we have, of course, the services but concerts that can have upwards of two or three hundred people we use the courtyards and set out food and keep at gates locked to prevent random passersby coming in uninvited i read the report it seems to me

the outlooks were hard to interpret the primary objections seems to be the loss of historic fabric obviously the vast jofk o majority will remain in place and the second objections the noticeable altercation that is true the primary feature of that front of the building arrest the 3 uniform doors that face golf street and everyone passing by didn't see that door hidden into the courtyard so for the passersby i feel not a significant difference you have to ask users is this building a museum behind a facade or is

this building being preferred to be part of communicated fabric and open to dependent o events that can be held in safety and comfort your decision to go with ar g plan will help us to insure the safety and comfort of flow throughout the building thanks so much. >> is there anyone else who wishes to speak on item number

and see. >> we've been been working diligently to preserve the historic church awfully utilize the building in a safe manner towards that end we've been warranted to raise funds and move forward with the schematic retrofit based on the plans prepared by ar g we do concur with the staff recommendation and except for the promoted condition of closing that door between the north wall and courtyard while we understand staffs position we as yours building the door providing circulation and egging debris to the courtyard it critical to the church functionality and good use we will request the commission approve the original ar g design and not go with the staff recommendation for that north door thank you for your time and

consideration. >> thank you is there any additional public comment? >> on this item. >> good afternoon commission i'm george thank you, very much for the opportunity to comment ♪ preceding i have been a member of trinity 19peter's for 10 years and i wish to talk about just the closure of that door that is being discussed her or here it seems to me staff criticized the plan that reduces the size of opening but staffs alternative suggestion to reduce to zero and essentially put a wall for a place of one hundred and 20 years people are walked

through it does we have to understand that there are essentially two classes of people who perceive the building the people that use it and the people that drive by staff says the ds highly visible you have to be landmarking looking for it from the street a second literally of walking by your aware of that door so people that are unused to using the building is used to the ironic 3 red door in the fronts people say oh, that's the one with the 3 red doors none outside this church mentioned the fourth door that is obscured by the building there is a historic pattern of movement

essentially closed off by a new facades i believe that staff's recommendation to preserve the allusion of the double doors but instead build a wall so the doors are completely destroyed one question which is the better approach to keep it ask scientific precision the appearance of door not noticed by none not familiar request the door or continue it to be a door it has been mentioned that it is convenient at times to close the 3 sets of doors in the front of the building facing the cross street and another reason is that the sanctuary is many my view and the view of other mitigations in the city one of the finest acoustic places to

sing or perform and closing o 3 red doors allows the street noise to be reduced that will no longer be an know if we are required to follow staffs recommendation thank you very much >> i'm sycamore i cynthia a member the saint peter's i want to put 0 on record the other folks (calling names) i just want to state my support what we stated more loren than i can thank you very much. >> any other member of the

public please step forward. >> thank you very much commission for our consideration of this my name is patrick anderson and i'm a member of the trinity saint peter's the equivalent of the board of directors and a member of the church for 28 years i also serve on the capital campaign committee trying to raise the funds to complete this retrofit and he want to make the point any change in plans at this point is going to put a tremendous burden on us raising several million dollars and it is not at all easy and any changes in the plan creates further issues and could endanger the project thank you very much. >> is there any additional public comment? >> wish to please be advised i

don't see any back to you, commissioners. >> >> commissioner hasz thank you i totally see where and understand staffs reasoning behind this, however, my experience on other seismic retrofit you're trying to create a strength and any opening takes away from that and has to be extra work has to be done to support it i'll shocked this is all they need to the not have to fill in more of the openings that is a fantastic treatment of the building and actually understand their need for that door i'll ask leave the original plan and ask not to paint that door red so not pay attention to it otherwise this is a great plan and i would approve that without

any conditions. >> thank you commissioner johnck well the original plans sound possible to me i'm curious about the discussion at the the architecture all review committee. >> no - oh, uh-huh. okay great but anyway, along with commissioner hasz i tolerantly see the rational what the original complaint was needed and i'll support that i know the motion supporting staff's recommendation and we'll take off the condition. >> okay. >> commissioner johns. >> you know i read the underlying materials and i understand and very much respect our commission staff and the way they carefully approached this this is a somewhat close call

but i think on the whole the church has the better of argument i would think i'm in favor of approving this but without the conditions. >> thank you i would last week to say i'm pleased that the church is going forward retrofit it is important to insure the effort for a small congregation i concur with the other commissioners. >> do you have a motion. >> move to approve no conditions. >> okay. i'll second that. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to approve this matter without conditions. >> placing commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda and commissioner president wolfram so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to zero. >> commissioners we will now go back to item 7

fiscal ye fiscal years 2016 to 2018 proposed work budget and informational presentation. >> good afternoon, commissioners john ramming with the department we're at that point of creating our budget and seems like we finished the last one this year a go year budget in the city's new policies presenting a two year fixed budget up into the last capture of budget so we'll be apprehending our budget for 2016-2017 starting july 1st as well as 2017 and 2018 as in the last four years our budget numbers are increasing every year ambassador we have seen no let down in the growth of new applications and in

proposing another sewer place and 40 percent increase in the budget next year the budget has more than doubted years this is extraordinarily i will ask tom to pack a ma a presentation we'll focus on the stable affairs in our current budget with the focus on the aspects the 4 o'clock the changes we're proposing in the budget not a full proposal yet in terms of total departmental budget prep that and come back in early february for the details for that i will introduce tom who you know our chief financial officer and wanted to introduce you to deborah our new finance officer that started last week and deborah our improve has moved on

the department of public works we wish him well and she is replying keith and has been working in the departments for several years with that, i'm going to turn it over to tom. >> thank you. good afternoon. i'm tom the departments administration going to do a financial update the current year budget and an overview of the next two year's budget the mayor realized the budget instructions as john mentioned in addition to the enterprise depends like mta and the airport a large number of department go to 20th century two years budgeting that is also the planning department unlike the two rolling budget the second year budgeted will not be opened up a process to amend that

project the mayor's office is figuring it out it if if is a large small supplemental but baeveng in a two year buckets and difficult to amend the second year the budget the budget instructions called for a 1.5 percent reduction to the general fund in both fiscal years as going back the department has $2.6 million in funds that is $38,000 reduction and $76,000 in 2017, 2018 in the current year we're again seeing large vacuums of applications and permit coming through the department last year, we understand with 14.6 percent increase over the prior year this year we are projecting

overall 13.8 in bricht and applications that is at that particular time into a refer sewer placing plus we're going to end with the $5 million revenue surplus we approached the mayor's office budget office about a supplemental appropriation to we can fund the large projects with that one time money and circling in conversation with them to that end i'll is what we downey done that the prior years converter in the revenue estimates to we've taken the actual from the prior year and seemed that is flat when we the revenue projections for the preceding fiscal year so sewer plusses and minuses in the last year's the act wulz the vitamin continue to grow we'll be presenting with the full budget

we'll assume a 4 percent growth next year and we have the k pi in 9 code with cpi 2 will the 7 and one percent next year and assume a 4 percent growth in revenue based on the current year os those are some of the volumes it is continued to increase the 12 and 13 percent increases in the volume have results in huge sewer plusses and minuses we've seen and again in the case in permit volume we'll assume a 4 percent increase over the cotter projected and then flat in 2017, 2018 in the current year that is the director of transportation of the ftes about 200 and 24 ftes in the department this year

allocated amongst 5 divisions and proposing a number of new positions to address some housing policy architecture all review a number of positions to deal with application processing so that will come forward a new resolution planner proposed in the budget and tim will go over that shortly and that's where we are is tim will go over the resources. >> good afternoon commissioners tim frye department staff a couple of things in this table as first, the preservation survey latin-american a sharp there i can't believe remember the technical part of amortization the survey cooperated for the citywide survey a position that

was in last year's bucket we hope to post that position very, very soon and then this now shows that that position will be part of our general make up of the staff for the survey program that is the one point zero in fiscal years 2016-2017 and, 2017 and 2018 the additional change you'll see in the thirds from the bottom the preservation planner we've seen you know just increased demands for preservation staff presence at the planning information center and done the best to accommodate but we're in a good position to fly staff it to have smoking gun anyone that giving advise throughout the day that will be that position you can see as you can see in the first floor the 77 fte and that happens in the next fiscal year other than that we've

anticipated that all positions as part of bathroom, will remain consistent one item that will probable come up for discussion later than today is agenda the legacy registry we don't have a good idea of how much staff time that may make depends upon the small business commission role and the commission you know any other took assistance the public may need in filling out proclamation or bringing those items to hearing that is something up for discussion that reluctance in half a person or full person we don't know the volume of applications to for the small business to participate in the registry part of funds and then. >> can you clarify for the

commission the in this chart this these ftes doesn't include the preservation planners within the quad responses citywide planning. >> actually, well let me double check that's correct will we have preservation enforcement? yes, that's correct then there are you know as you may know two preservation quadrant planners not rescued in the line item for the divisions application and entitlements work >> thank you. >> and again, this is to give you an idea of what the pipeline will look like in the upcoming

fiscal years the first, testimony ceqa hr e work ends fiscal year 2017 and 2018 and $75,000 allocated to assist our environmental preservation team more fairly large project like bonds initiatives for instance, a bond flinch if rec and park requires us to elevates 38 clubhouses that is contracted out by a consultant or done in house by a preservation staff it takes a good amount of time this allows us a small pile of money to hire our consultants to get that work complete the second line item the article 10 pot program reis saved money for a pilot program this is the 11 thousand 2 volunteering we're

anticipating everyone wants a plague so the city will provide not only technical assistance but also provide the plaques to those for installation an article 10 buildings the additional survey contract we are always over the last couple of years put a small amount of money in the budget for any survey pilots or additional survey work to get the citywide survey europe and running in the initial fiscal year as a pilot program and into the development methodologies in the next fiscal year we may be looking for more money to get the project underway but we believe that is sufficient to initiate the project the go grant is a variety of

projects often a context statement we'll anticipate we'll receive that in the upcoming years and friends of city planning gives the preservation team a grants for the library this is helpful in assisting us with the in house research and used by the entire department with the focus on historic preservation and the department of the exterior interior that is the grant we received and this is primarily to hire a consultant to prepare national register for the church and the women's building and the ymca in japantown the second part of program we'll be to develop a work program for the commission bans social and cultural heritage foresight in the 5 most

holistic statements this is an opportunity for us to expand and look for ways to memorialize and recognize those resources with that, i will let tom continue. >> thank you also want to mention the last item one not it on the property budget coming through the $50,000 in each year to provide transcription services for about the historic preservation commission and the planning commission i didn't put it on the slide that is a shared cost not 100 percent for hpc but that is in the proposed budget and the rest of calendar we'll come back to the commission on february 3rd with the full departments budget and ask for the recommendation of the budget and work probation officer

program on the fourth and 11 we'll present the budget to the planning commission, the budgets to the mayor's office on february 22nd it will be introduced to the boards at the boards an june one and at the ends of july the full board approves the budget and that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. >> any questions. >> does any member of the public wish to speak on this matter seeing none, and hearing none back to the commissioners public school commissioner johnck. >> i want to say that what is expressive to me since allison park or i've been on the commission is that the examination the capacity of planning department and our

departments particularly preservation work to rise the the public ability we've had to add staff to assist the draft environmental impact reports and this whole legacy business program that, you know, that will be an additional work but i think all of that, of course, the ceqa influence too is really important so i would just is i'm impressed with what we've accomplished in increasing the erect it means additional money but money well worth our eventual value. >> commissioner hyland. >> i wanted to point out that having the preservation planner full-time at the station is a great idea and don't understand exactly but a public facing

person to basically get over-the-counter reviews that is really important we should support that we should be talking about the legacy business in an later agenda item we need to ask for something for staff in my understanding small business commission will ask for two staff people and as we get into the discussion at the next agenda item it appears that's why i reached attest 0 supervisor campos as well as supervisor peskin we need to understand and work with regina the staff person where the r with the small business commission to iron out the differences and the hpc can support the small business but our staff will have a large roll

in elevating the aspects of the businesses so at a minimum one i don't know if we're going to be overcaution and ask for two to be added if we don't get it in we have others power things that maybe dazed we'll have the legislation prop j allows three hundred legacy businesses to be recognized in advance of the provided per year that if mean only three hundred applications maybe 6 hundred the first year thank you, no other comments thank you for your presentation. >> commissioners we've screwdriver itconsidered item 8

at van ness avenue for your review and comment. >> good afternoon, commissioners. >> department staff the national park service asks the planning department to participate in the memorandum of understanding for the proposed schematic upgrades for this pursuant to the chapter of the national historic action requests them to comment on the late version which was received january 5th, 2016, a letter documenting the comments maybe prepared if so the letter some

preclude the historic preservation commission agents with the area the of ap e and from the treatment measures all the mitigation measure the director of the planning department will have a letter containing the letter to the national parks service with the preservation offers and the project sponsor and any other interested parties the planning department seeks the recommendation from the hpc on whether or not the planning director should seek this agreement pump station is at the end of conveniently a van ness in the flaet corner now known and a as fort mason within the golden gate recreation area that was in 1913 a component of water as long as is a w s f it pumps

from the golden gate bay pump station two a rectangle building of concrete designed in the mission style the two salvation have the painted windows and spanish style clad in red tile just south of pump station number two, two 50 thousand watertank to the northwest and attached to the bay garage that will have the you upgrades and the building foundation walls and roof requires seismic retrofitting and some of the equipment needs to need to be removed and the project sponsor is here to talk about the scope of work in the presentation. >> and this is the declaration

adopted on september 10, 2009, for the seismic fit a minor modification to the scope of work for pump station number two was issued no 2015 and it should be noted the measures are similar to the culture mitigation setback in the negative declaration the following are the staff vshgdz for the project the area of the potential pump number two is individually listed in the register of historic places as of 1975 and structures have been identified with the national

hectic district additionally pump station two is a fort mason district - within the fort mason strip the proposed undertaking is a adverse effect on pump station number two as has a adverse effect on the windows and garage the interior walls will be reimbursed under the columns and the facade had been reigned in place the rear boilers will be replaced 10 small rectangle windows are approximately 7 nymphs closer to the outside way the garage will be repaired or reconstructed the adverse effect is in detail on

panning 9 the finding to address do adverse effect on pump station number two the siding for the historic preservation commission and the city and county of san francisco would execute and implement an memoranda of agreement that requires the dollar that's a good question those mitigation measures are to address the historic reservoirs and included include the understanding that pump house will be the subject bit affirmative and drawings following the american building survey and the historic engineering records a number of the historic features with the building will be preferred or relocated westbound the building additionally signs will be installed and this explains the function of this during the project exterior

empire could like the original pumps and the narrow band of between the steel columns will be protected to void damage in conclude the department staff agrees with the review and staff concurs with the definition of the project depiction and undertaking provided in the effect of staff concurs with the existence of the area of potential effect and staff concurs with the finding the project will have an adverse effect on the property staff concurs with the execution of moa the litigation measures that reduces the adverse of undertaking and it is appropriate we agree with the comments relaid and since the 2010 letter should be maintained to repair

rather than replace the existing windows and staff encourages the upgrades in the drawings with having and repairing those existing windows in conclude we're asking the health commission to comment on the late version and comments on the language this will go to the ship 0 and asking a remains from the hpc on whether the planning director should be a snitchy on this agreement here to talk about the project. >> in the past the planning director was a signatory with

this just substandard procedure. >> commission tim frye the city attorney may have additional advise but our understanding the director shows - >> would you like me to address that par victor deputy city attorney our advise is not necessary but it is fine from the director worries about to sign the ordinance as required but the hpc reviews the signatures. >> sir good afternoon, commissioners i'm scott an environmental manager and the sfpuc and dave meyers the

projector person and with the san francisco public utilities commission and half a been assist us with the design. >> can i get the screen please sfgov go to the computer so the a w sf is a pump station number two one of the pump stations in the city and one south of market that will pumpkin bay water into the system in a a w ss pumping system normally the system spilled by a reservoir on twin peaks but if it fails the two pump station can be used a

fail-safe and it is provided to have the system that might be unavailable zalewski two pictures of hydrants those are the a w s f hydrants the smaller one is from over the water system and the a w ss system is designed could work after a seismic events where some systems might not two hydrants are in front of city hall right now as pointed out the pump station number two is on van ness at forts mason it was constructed in 1913 that was was it looked in 1920 this is interesting you can see the

bay going you will 80 up to the mr. building before the maritime facilities were contradicted of constructed. >> this is what that looked like in 1915 when it was built fort mason was under the jurisdiction of other agency it is owned by the government the city didn't own the property and they operate a pump station by an act of congress.

>> there was an upgrade in 1975 it was run by oil fat boilers and here's another view the interior in 1975 the boilers on the far side and the pumps are in the foreground when was upgraded in the 70s the steam turbines were replaced with diesel engines and the smokestack was replaced and the boilers have been inoperable since then

some of the equipment that was taken offline they were rained in the eastern wall the activated electrical walls and panel that was retained in place looks at interesting. >> that's a little bit better the hectic status and justin talked about that i'm going to point out we're not proposing anything any work to be done on the concrete walls to the south the garage was actually built after the pump station was from the neighborhoods by al extras owned by the park service the project again is not proposing but m t s wants it put spot case review to taken down and looked

at it a at a later date so justin went to the purpose we have to retrofitted the building this would be a pretty bad building and also to bring a note to ada requirements the existing floor plan you know large sized sheets in the agenda packet as you can see the barrels on boilers on top those will be rental unit eventually that is the proposed project the biggest difference is union square there are sheer walls

constructed at the corners it turned out to be the original location to construct and those are where the smaller windows were headed most of boilers are from the facade it - we're

retaining the features for the windows we'll talk about in a second and the skylight roof needs to be replaced an old concrete in danger of being collapsed the smaller rectangle windows are recessed about 8 inches those needs to be enclosed to fit if the sheer wall the windows will become inoperables are similar on the outside and but that will be painted in black and hopefully not seeing a difference this is solved this is will show the old positions and as is m bs state we're going

to try and especially in those specifications to keep as much of the old windows we don't know the conditions we don't know if oversee are on the same pageable or not this is a picture of the crane on the left side of the picture the crane meets up with the eastern wall and sees crane is on two rails one rail is close to the windows and that is the constraint we have we have to built the sheer wall between the wall and the train rail the material features a lot will be retained but other interior

features we need to work on a little bit the interior walls will be covered to strengthen them along with portions the trim the there's metal trench place of residence around the boilers and materials around that those trenches need to be filled in otherwise they represent a avoid not ready for retrofitting and the crane will be restricted the pipe demolition on those in our packet as well electrical will be removed but examples for interpretive purposes the original electrical panel will be moved about 5 feet and skip to the rest of this

fast it is a complicated project the basement equipment will be moved it is another avoid it needs to be filed and it will be moved behind the facades in the same alignment jason went through the alignment litigation so i don't think i fled to do that that's it. >> thank you i have one question will the it. rhyme in operation. >> the pumps station will not be in operation during construction we're actually working on a pump station number one in the basement of the fire department haudz heads whether that job is complete there will be one pump station operable. >> thank you. >> commissioner johnck. >> this is a fascinating

project i'm occurs any public interpretation from around this i don't recall any. >> there is not people asked. >> this is exciting i thought that was a key roll in history of the city and the region and the state of california 0 so when i read the cultural landscape a couple years ago i thought fort mason we'll get it out to the public thank you thank you. >> commissioner president lazarus. >> i have i guess we're before us whether we want to sign on as signatorys the type of questions whether this is future study the building envelope that has the

adverse effect over and over the equipment to the size and a. >> it is a combination of historic features we looked at various options on trying to retrofit the balls but the chiropractors are the only place to do that the as i said we're trying to figure out a way to a safe with an the boilers that turned out not possible as well. >> is it possible for the sheer walls. >> i find is - >> it decreases the strength of the sheer walls but it pretty dense load on the ceiling so that was actually a question that both our staff had and m bs had to which is why we underwent the modeling. >> it this an acceptable

facility than. >> yes. >> any other questions. >> i know we'll move to public comment thank you very much is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this tem if so please step forward. >> serging and hearing none xhovk. >> i'd like to move we accept this the question before us the only question whether to agree that our director should sign the moa. >> if we have comments we concur with staffs comments. >> well, i concur with staffs comments and recommend the director sign the moa report. >> yeah. >> i don't know where you need what sort of a a motion those are my comments. >> are we are doing much with

the comments. >> you can there is no official motion a recommendation to staff to the director to add on a signatory so you can do that during the consequence. >> i move to the director of the department sign the my mind of agreement with the folks. >> thank you commissioners a motion second to remedy the director add himself as a signatory are you commissioner hasz commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner hyland commissioner president wolfram so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero. >> commissioners we can move

on to item 10 the landmark designation program. >> good afternoon susan parks department staff the item before you the quarterly reports others on the landmark to december 31st of last year as usual i'll go through the work program and others items that come before you in the next few months i'm give you an update on the survey of the projects and the performance measures we are tracking as you saw a busy quarter this commission death penalty the lgbtq hectic context statement one designation university ladies home was approved by the board of supervisors and as i said by the mayor becoming landmark and as tim mentioned the cal house were approved by

the historic preservation commission and forward to the board of supervisors and the historical contract were approved at the board as far as on the landmark designations the presbyterian church and the great code of witnesses come before you with the building on the agenda the initiations for the sailors union remains on hold and staff received did landmark designation applications during the quarter 1 r 815 but that item was not added staff intelligence to work with the landmark district to finalize the designation for the port since the landmark designations application we received 5 applications which accounted our

15 this course of staff time each in order to handle the hours we spent on the community generated applications you are idea to bring those in the form of a fact sheet for a full designation report and provide you with information about the property included in our packet is how it will work and if you want to pass those out jonas so as you can see once the application is submitted to staff we'll bring that forward to you as forwarded with the staff memo attached but, take action to add to the the program like other project we're to

follow the program with an notice of violation or initiation with a case report if it is initiated that precedes in a fashion to the board of supervisors once submitted the application you may also decide not to add that to the work program in the designation process or may direct the applicant to work with the staff as on valencia street this is where the process is slightly different you can list the designation from the fact sheet the hearing will move to a recommendation hearing over and over the property not up for designation and end the process you may direct the project sponsor to work with the staff it will come back you, you as a fact sheet until you reach a decision whether or not to end the designation.

>> a requirement under the choice number one number one where we add to the program we require the designation can we add to the project practicing panel and not prioritize. >> i can add it it will not be a priority. >> thank you. >> but the nominee you'll see the fact sheet will present application that was submit for the landmark district as you may know in addition to the work program to the historic preservation commission we are currently w working with the health commission on the report the african-american historic plan pa plan was on website and up for public comment and expected to come before at the february 7th hearing for adoption we're curiosity looking at the reports for sacrificed

heart church and the heats and so you're aware of other staff projects coming ♪ quarter the historic statement has a resource survey coming in february for adoption and in anticipation a context statement and survey staff will be doing community outreach and conducting outreach in march as far as the performance measures we said we're prepared by the landmark one and 50 hours the months recent designation for the haul exceeded the number and 200 and 17 hours our goals of the, was complete in 73 hours and he university old ladies home 84 hours the second the article 10 and application was submitted last april to the site

third, that we provide comments to landmark designations within thirty days as of this quarter no new applications and lastly the quarterly report will be sent to >> some of the items moved to the pipeline that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you, commissioners my questions. >> mr. fry and commissioners tim frye department staff two questions for you one is that maybe beneficial to amend the landmark designation application with the hearing flow chart we've shared way a better way to give me the public the understanding of the steps to bringing something through the

landmark process the reason we suggest that because it technically adds an additional hearing depending on the department but minimize the information to provide us to schedule it now they don't dr. the burden of the fact sheet we believe will be enough for the commission to days whether or not to take action and certainly seek our direction on whether to do that. >> thank you, commissioner fry and imcommissioner matsuda ii have a question is there a replacement or someone phil in for a colleague he was assigned a number of project. >> yes. tim frye department staff we are right now holding interviews for the backfill for

kelly wong's position once that is filled which we hope to fill in the next couple of weeks d h.r. will help us backfill the position we're hoping in february. >> seeing no other questions move to public comment thoikz if so, please come forward serging and hearing nun back to you, commissioners. >> commissioners first of all, do we want to take mr. fries suggestion of adding. >> that had been added to the chart. >> in the landmark designation application for the public currently sort of a list of the steps it takes to bring something to a hearing i think this would be helpful to explain to them exactly what steps would

be - change based on the commission action. >> sounds like a good idea to me and any other comments before the programs priorities in the program? no thank you very much for the presentation also i think this flow chart is very helpful and again, it is good to organize the information in terms of the processes you're going introduce the performance measures was very good done presentation >> nothing further move on to the civic center plan informational presentation. >> commissioner president wolfram and commissioners good afternoon and my name is neil thank you for the opportunity to come and give you this presentation to you today, i manage the city dialogue group for the san francisco ethics commission for the planning

department and the urban designers for the city under our that you have we have 3 main tracks urban design disorder the developments we have overlap with the commission and public work and take until and temporary plaza that the festival that was on market street last year one of the zones which i believe will be coming to you at our next meeting and do ground work in terms of the broadway and castro and market street and public realm plans we'll talk about this is the first time over staff had the opportunity to come before you and take a moment of who we are and our breath of work and very much look forward to having this conversation we from the beginning working closely with the preservation

staff to understand the opportunities that the civic center presence presents and thoroughly understand the public contact and work with tim and a wonderful relationship and wonderful tremendous insight given the main presentation is lucky perry the leader in our streetscape work and the p m for the public civic center plan. >> thank you neil and good afternoon commissioners gary urban designer with the planning department it is exciting do present this new project so coming i you because of importance of civic center as a historic landmark and i'll talk about an overview we'll start is the general introduction and good evening to historical highlights some design

challenges the civic center faces and basically the scope of the project is civic center public realm plan is one components of a larger work program that the long run citywide mraerngz is articulating on the initial looking at the future the downtown for the social and economic and urban design prospective the plan on the area showing the area in blue roughly from market street on the east to golden gate on the north and golf street on the west it enincumbrance the landmark district in red and also bright yellow focus areas we'll talk about more later so a bit of history as you may know your familiar i'll pull out a few highlights the civic center has its organizing in

1919 this is a birds eye view largely influences as we know it and the public realm and carried it through the great depression in 0 world war ii this is has new planning for the public realm a modern night in 1953 and followed in 1948 the largest change to the civic center is what the excavation the civic center plaza for the facility and the parking garage and the resulting reconstruction of plaza in 19 61 the plaza we have today in the 1980s and 90s new plans the relatives of those plans are focused on the program in the the civic center those simple phone haul the public realm was

completed in 1998 a is almost 20 years old since the 1990s it's grown and as a residential neighborhood the a.c.t. c one example of the arts venues that opened in the civic center in the last couple of decades and in the middle one conversion of one hundred van ness that speaks to the emerging residential neighborhood that is growing to the south of civic center and in fact, the city is looking at that area and increasing the hub study a historic reference to a historic area near the golf section 2015 is the centennial city hall by the way, the center we know and in 2015 a bunch of milestones for planning that happens with for the center a few you're familiar with the

historic district landscape inventory our adopted i like to acknowledge the people in the audited that plan will greater for the public and the civic center playground innovation which it is the certificate of appropriateness for in 2015 and variety of work done by mta and the puc and the office of economic workforce development focus on the civic center will what will the goal plan side to build the plans for the civic center and create within cooperated interdepartmental plan for the street and other public spaces the planning department is leading but working closely with public works and the mta and puc given their recent planning and the division of real estate and also

building partnerships are the department of public health and the office of economic workforce development outreach will be robust there are many civic center stakeholders for people that live and work with the area and the organizations there are located and because it is the serving everyone has a stake in its future we're planning a robust series of outreaches in 2016 and developing a link list of stakeholders so going more into the step of the plan step back we talk about public realm talking about the streets and plaza and parks and other unusual public places underneath the civic center has as i mentioned san francisco civic center plays a unique part in the hearts so the next

section i'll talk about some of the challenges repreliminarily talked about to identify the civic center street design well the streets in the civic center picture of grove street they serve as barriers as safety issues and lack the landmark how to design overseeing streets to be more as places not just corridors but an important reflective your parking and street design this photo shows the area around the monument that oftentimes serves as a parking lot how to be more efficient in the parking and loading in active ground zero the civic center is beautiful historic but oftentimes at the ground floor is inactive it creates dead zones what can we do to create transparency on the ground floor

more activation between the buildings and sidewalk i mentioned public spaces and public spaces were a united public space from market street to city hall their frathd design and lack a long term design for though how to balance the competing desires for those civic center places par unwelcomed public spaces seating was removed from the plaza few years ago due to concerns over havingcy to nobody what wee can we do to create a welcoming space in civic center how to work with public health and other agencies to look at the issues of homelessness in the area and how to make those spaces welcoming for all users

streetscape and materials you often see a patchwork in terms of paiflg and lighting and landscape how to create a unified material so any agency don't go work it results in something that is better sorry a better streetscape there you go under utilized public seats that is brooks haul the storage area the pipe organ for the exposition on the right side of the photo how might we create the used to activate the public realm and we're frequently going to activate that speculation 3 scales of activation in the center there is the. >> (repeated.) >> the constitution of the united states. neighborhood and even though weekly like the farmer's market. >> small steps to city hall to large events like pride or the

giants when we win the world series how to function those well for all of those evening environment is very important if in the serving due to the cultural services how to improve latin-american and safety etc. so the plan compose the first 0 components we'll be working on the author analysis how people use the civic center through the october's how many people are using the space are restanding or lingering or spending time in the public spaces and using those data to to the design decisions streetscape design standards working closely with the public works develop a sit down of standards for lighting and

landscaping the mta to look at the streets how to be better designed and the conceptual designs areas we have identified 10 percent of conceptual designs for the improvements those areas i'll briefly mention the civic center plaza and on the united nation plaza and grove street and programs alleyways we haven't divided which alleys and finally, the rear the courtyard you see as gateway to the civic center on the north side this is another components within thing to have great public space how to create the stewardship and

the physical changes to make them more active and implementation strategy working with the communities to develop priorities what are the most important priorities for phase one and hopefully to secure did securities for the faengs and finally, the environmental review includes the environmental review with the environmental impact reports which will bring us closer to the implementation so the plan schedule we're currently finalizing the scoping and will do that in the spring and start the analyze in the late spring and through the summer and he did conceptual development will occur in the fall we anticipate there the architectural commissioner lee to share designs and continue to have the review and refinements

in the early 2017 and anticipate the desirable review in early 2017 in june of 2019 with plan adoption in the summer and i mentioned earlier the outreach will be ongoing to the plans and anticipate our project in the late spring or latest summer that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions >> commissioners any questions for mr. perry. >> no we will take public comment and have more later is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this tem i have one speaker card for mr. hayes. >> two items i'd like to share but i'm dwlltd to be here more than two years since i lobbied

perhaps with the mayor into funding this project which i have alluded to you in the past it is now real a good deal of staff devoted to it and commitment the time it has taken not reflective of the serious neglect i'd like to share two documents. >> jonas. >> that's been going on for decades the first document is a letter i wrote to the rec and park commission after they cleared and approved the playground which you saw i was dismayed in the could you say they didn't mention it is appointed history which i recall a hundred years of responsibility and 50 years of neglect on their parts i point

out that is- the other documents i'm sharing the letter i sent to the mayor pointing out in april of 1941 the board of supervisors designated the civic center is h james ralph and since the world war ii i recommend to the mayor and others that we implement that i think bringing the civic center together and the responsibility for 8 of the 12 buildings of the 10 years in office given the civic center a appointee to it i hope you'll support implementing that ordinance

thank you is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak on item number commissioner johnck this is terrific project because of institutions renovated over the last 25 years so many people are around here and came into from all over the region and people fly in from austria and place like that i didn't see anywhere i see you mentioned mta but what about bart and this is the access areas from our public transportation system is it end and bart is key to the whole system i want to make sure that bart is added as

inclusion to the stakeholder and i was curious to talk to the thinking the director of the veterans war memorial and as well as a gentleman who was in favor had in charge of the security this was prior to the landscape inventory i had great comments about what was how to balance out the historic preservation commission and securities carry down things like that this was awhile back and trees that are a heritage asset but security issues so i was very much taken with their needs and how for those types of considerations will be in the public realm planning department

so thoroughly endorse our work on this thank you. >> thank you, commissioners any other comments i would thank you commissioner johnck for your comments on bart's that is a good comment so many people exit at bart's station and poor qualities of that urban experiences coming out flo through some of the tunnels and the actual quality of condition of those station at&t station is lacking a good thing to integrate i look forward to the next presentation and definitely can use improvement thank you. >> thank you pursue commissioners, if there's nothing further on to item 12 the legacy business regular

comment. >> i wanted to introduce regina the director of the office of small business to give you an overview the historic preservation commission that was approved this and i'd like to talk about the options we raid out for the applications to the regiony and want to let you know hillary of the supervisor campos office their office is in the impact of the registry program and have comments they envision with that, i'm going to turn it over to and come back at the ends. >> good afternoon, commissioners regina the director of the office of small business so in our packet you have seen the applications

instructions and the applications part of the feedback that my commission has provided to me in the direction of the application is to make that very simple for our businesses understanding that there is a broad range of businesses that have different levels of capacity in completing an application so what we do have at that particular up to this point in time the application instructions starts after the laying out the criteria for the prop j so it looks like so at the particular up to this point in time as per the prop j and the original ordinance it is the

mayor or the board of supervisors who nominate a potential legacy business so right now we all have requested to the mayor and the board of supervisors that they submit the nomination upon that submittal submit the nomination with the application or we will contact the business and then have them complete the nomination we have been contact by businesses and letting them know our officer is not facility the application process unless they've been nominated by the mar or board of supervisors that may change down the road but tying up there is not staffing to do that with that particular way and then once we have received

the application have determined and just determined at the end of last week we've received one application so we've started receiving the applications is once the application has been received we'll review it and i determine whether it is you know once we've determined it is complete then that will be forwarded open to the historic preservation commission staff and i think that part of today's execution for you to sort of workout some of the finer details i'm also you know want to get an understanding in terms of core elements of what you're looking for an application that farther on i have a full understanding that items you're looking for are included so anticipate you have thirty

days to review the application then it is forwarded back to the office of small business tea scheduled for the small business commission to have a hearing with an approval are denial were we'll set out the app and the last part of yours in the application instructions we have 4 sections one the information that is asked firemen's of who is submitting and filing the names the businesses who is submitting and filing the application business addresses interested in knowing and if the business address no longer is a criteria that the bills is founded or headquartered in san francisco interesting to know from the business is founded in san francisco we ask for that for more historical data than required criteria then any other addresses that their multiple locations were did other locations within san

francisco second 3 the native component this is where the business tells their story based on the criteria their history and culture and relevancy and in the 3 criteria that is outlined and i will go ahead and read them the businesses operating in san francisco are for thirty or more years with no break in san francisco operations exceeding two years and from the businesses operated for more than 20 years but less than thirty and sill satisfies the criteria the small business commission of these this business as significantly contributed to the history avenue particular neighborhood or communities and if not knit in the registry they'll face displacement again even with that criteria we

have to remember the mayor or the board of supervisors that makes that determination of the businesses under thirty years the businesses troubled to the neighborhood history or identity of the community and the business is commented to the physical altercations defined including the art formations so section 3 is the business telling their story about those 3 criteria and those 3 criteria and we've asked for them excuse me. to submit any other elements information so if their a restaurant with a copy of they're first menu or i said retained the business form to provide a little bit more a

visual context to the business that is outlined in the application instructions then section 4 the point that the business is a affirming very don't owe any back taxed or licenses or permits that the city requires of them and no labor violation and to do the due diligence to share had they're good with the city sort of their financial relationship and their financial relationship with the city so that is the key process we have heard from some businesses from in section 3 is still whether or not for them to answer to you do want you to know we have a small business

development center an organization partial fund by the small business commission and the city as a host they do business assistance an is operational side have agreed to write the busy narratives and issues of being able to communicate their story so we've started to work on tying up the technical assistance for those businesses the so i think maybe i should do sort of ask if new particular questions as of me through the application process. >> any questions >> commissioner konstin's. >> on the board of supervisors not the single supervisor but the majority has to vote.

>> a single supervisor not necessarily have to be the supervisor of the district that your business resides in so just a supervisor didn't get brought to the board or anything. >> correct. >> who have you heard from. >> what kind of businesses. >> well, i've golden entries from kitchen immigrant of grant companies a flag pole company a couple of bars and we've received one application from supervisor campos office for presidio. >> okay. and i'm sorry, i need to get my head into this initiative do we have a limit of how many bars and restaurants whether there is three hundred per year. >> three hundred per year at

it particular at this point in time our commission no cap in terms of numbers of supervisors or allocation per mayor or supervisor and there has the commission has decided at many particular at this time those industry segments sectors at this point in time not necessary to put any sort of numbers to the applications i think that we i know the fact that at least the registry program we're still seeing we are you know that the businesses though i've talked with businesses and given them the process and told them to reach out to their supervisor and

mayor the fact we've not goggles more in at that particular at this point in time the need to create some of those qualifiers. >> i was curious if there were any thank you. >> commissioner matsuda. >> thank you for sharing this notion information with us do you have a ball park number how many small businesses in the city and county of san francisco that are eligible for this. >> ted egan look at introduce the done and brad street i think that is closer to 5 so i think that is maybe a little bit closer to 5 and 5 thousand and limited to three hundred businesses per year that will be

accepted. >> ; correct. >> and then i'm so happy this legislation came if i'm if i'm not mistaken an intent for this legislation to prioritize small business that are not affiliateed with change a business in a certain area for thirty or 40 years doing one particular an ice cream shop the financial incentives that are available for a part of a chance even though a small chance for capital or capacity to stay around versus a smaller within person or family type of business i'm wondering if this may be considered as part of criteria in terms of the point spread i think that is proposed

not sure i thought that might be something to consider and some of the others i'm not sure i should be looking this and to shelly about the points proposed seems like again, the tint or intent of the legislation this legislation hopefully given priority to overseeing businesses under recommended or has the capability or the vulnerability more than others i saw some probability shouldn't be considered or a lesser protrude as others i don't know if we look at this page by page by specific comments and thank you a couple of things in terms of for what your staff is proposed to provide you with february

with our our commission has directed our office nevertheless of the application so initially i promoted the concept of a point system they were clear they didn't want that not wanting to be evaluating in terms of - they made that clear they didn't want our office application to have a point system within other element to give consideration to in terms of your proposal is that under item k of page 4 is the organization rockefeller financially stable so our commission had a discussion on that i think on their discussion they have determined they if not to be in business of reilly looking at and assessing a business financial statements and didn't

think that was an appropriate thing and how so - i think that that should be given consideration that we will not be assessing and evaluating direction and so for you to gain that information is only exceed the amount of time that your staff is going to have to take i'm not sure how relevant that is i think what is important to understand is that we have the legacy business preservation fund but there will be businesses that apply to be 0 the registry and not be assessing the funds so the merit of business an the business should be the merit of the business on the registry and for those that you know for the need

of saving the preservation funds that is the next step but i think that is important to know there will be businesses who are at a place their businesses that own their space so the property owner they'll not be visible to assess the landlord grant so kind of keep these in mind not every business will be going to be - to have the need to assess the preservation fund. >> can i ask one more question. >> thank you for that clarification so operate priority is given a inform a business not owning the lands and others landlord that wants to make improvements that will be the business a priority

made like that. >> so we're still drafting the rule making over the - around the administrative the preservation fund so i don't have is a definite answer using our criteria as having a ranking preference as to who will be eligible for the preservation funds at it particular at this point in time. >> your during the period what's your timeline. >> to have it developed to be submitted to the board of supervisors by the ends of february. >> okay. then so we would make comment to our planning department staff about that prior. >> commissioner hasz. >> thank you so do we have a funds a dollar

amount. >> no so i will need to go to the board of supervisors to either ask for a supplemental or it will be part of budgeting process the july one 2016 budget. >> okay. this is sort out of order but ask what your staff will be review in this. >> what are they reviewing and writing about? >> yeah. >> commissioners, if you don't mind a good time to step in and talk about the review process and invite regina back up so we need to figure out with the historic preservation commission rule the legislation

says the small business commission will refer the applications party dates to review it and those are things we need to decide and the south report we have had options since then consulted with the city attorney's office and learned that it didn't appear that the commission can designated staff board to another committee so that leaves the only option 2 and 3 right. >> for that seems to be a viable method of review this will be the individual and immediate hpc hearing so upon request the nomination can be automatically places on the next available hpc agenda as a content item with a brief staff memo a recommendation break off

brief as in one or two pages and insure that the commission has an opportunity to review and decide nomination within the thirty day window this would require that staff schedule and attend the advisory hearing for each nomination and depending on the number of nomination could be consider about staff times but, of course, it is unknown the vacuum of applications at this point in time the other option we late out i'm calling an annual schedule of hpc hearings the commission could request that the small business commission structure the program to accept applications except for those that need mediate attendance on a quarterly or annual process similar to another application if so forwarded and back to the hpc and then any of the - then we

could give you are staff recommendations for a group of nominations rather than a single nomination this will create a sorry more preeblt and staff and the commission scheduling and may allow for helpful comparison the different nominations you'll have several in front of you at ounce, however, this could result in a large amount of nominations that results in difficulties and delay the nominations for that the contentious that are facing imminent risk of displacement that lace out the two processes for review we've also suggested that we started to think about the consent of the information you've receive the application and the application as drafted by regina's officer asked

questions they give quantify information we're recommending you consider formatting the staff report or your recommendation to the commission in the form of a check list are yes and no answers and qualify the yes and no answers we think this might expedite somewhat the significant value of each time culture asset so giving you a list of types of questions we might consider putting on the check list can be a yes or no but teaches locates and suggested about a petition - however, it is information that would like to provide could be

useful information so some of the questions require the additional information from the applicant but some of the information could be derived from the application that is currently written so with that, i wanted to let you know today, i received a letter from sf heritage committing on the review processes we've laid i've a copy of that letter in case you didn't receive it i've reviewed it they have really excellent comments one of which is they recommend that is commission recommendation to the small business commission would identify the characteristic features that's asked for the commission to comment directly on the features i think might be

important the sf heritage as recommended in addition to recognizing as a business associated with a national register property we also recognize explore whether or not the business is located in a heritage corridors they also suggest is that the planning department may consider jaift it's own technical support to bring to the mayor's office we get to play a role in helping them thinks the can remember role of their business with that, i'm going to turn it over to hillary and she'd last week to add any comments on the process and if any questions i'm available. >> commissioner hyland. >> this is is the city attorney here can we get more

information why we can't delegate this to the cultural heritage. >> ohioy wong deputy city attorney the administrative code indicates that we as the small business ask do the recommendation from the historic preservation commission specifically and the chart the only specific designation loitsd the delegation for the administrations sorry delegation that can xrels not allow other delegations but charter says historic preservation commission

shall take anothers issues up and the ordinance didn't make any reference to the delegation so the best course of action for the commission to provide the recommendation as riders by the ordinance. >> is there a way to change that what's the process. >> amend the ordinance. >> through the board of supervisors and no there the commission. >> proposition. >> additional quells. >> so i see the agent of one of our supervisors. >> turning to present i'm higy with supervisor campos we offered this legislation additional met with a couple of you to get the feedback during the drafting process so i'm extremely excited to be here he

historic combrsh legislation we believe that will make a big difference in preserving the hectic businesses in a city that makes san francisco and our commercial corridors the special place that is so we're very excited to be here we had some comments and suggests suggestions about the planning commission memo how you're going to weigh in think each business that is nominated and put on the legendary business recommendationy and my comments and supervisor campos comments related to sort of the dual goals of having the hpc weigh in and in myself way as you to the businesses contribution to the identity of a particular neighborhood will

mother provide undue burden on the business that is already coagulate through a complications link process to get on the registry starting with contracting the supervisors office or the mayor's office to make the case to be nominated in the first place and getting the application together and making the case before you and ultimately before the small business commission so it is already quite a long process and many of the businesses that will be eligible for the registry are run by mono illegal unit that don't speak worker not used to negating the city processes and at the moment not much administrative support and we want to make sure we're creating a process that doesn't become to diverse the businesses will not apply so have an opportunity to

work how it is intended to work tars that ends we thought that a combination between option number one and number 2 were the best options in that i think so that this city attorney says we can't delegate the responsibility to staff but having the staff using the check list i'll have a couple of comments on the check list but prepare a small report and recommendation to you and where that recommendation is positive that it goes on the consents agenda and considered you know the busiest a positive recommendation and on the consent agenda not feel the need to present and make a case at an extra hearing but a negative recommendation that may raise some alarm bells and taken off the agenda and make it's case

why the planning department staff got it wrong that streamlines the prosecutes and nostril overly burdened the process but allows a subcontractor were the historic preservation commission so that would be our and supervisor campos suggestion and over office suggestion in terms of the list of questions that are on the check list we had some additional comments the first comment is that we similar to the small business commission did not building that question number or alerted k and l were relevant for a number of reasons numbering the rule of the historic preservation commission is really look at the role of the business in making up and adding to the history and identity of the neighborhood and

whether or not the businesses find it relating financially stable not to that question but number 2 descends designed this legislation to booster the businesses they can be stable because of long term nature of the business but having difficulties in the current commercial real estate boon so the point of the legislation to create those few minutes that will help to stabilize those businesses to get penalized in the check list for not in the best financial situation is contrary and defeats the purpose number one and number 2 an additional question whether or not the businesses have been mentioned in the historic record whether the newspapers or you know city hall legislative

records or other areas add that information and provide that to you and then finally we weren't crazy about the point system we thought that could have an untints consequences of comparing apples and oranges and raise that differentiation and even for an example question b where's the business located it is not clear located in multiple neighborhoods more points than just in one off the beaten pathway i'm not sure that make sense and there are businesses that might end up getting i know when you add up the points not look like the historic asset in san francisco but that's not indeed the case and narrative explanation and recommendation really would work manipulative

better so thank you very much for the role our playing ♪ important legislation prior to being on the ballot and passing and now it is going to make a big difference for san francisco kudos to you >> thank you very much. >> have we done. actually take a brief break and public comment and we all have comments oh, does the supervisor peskin do you have any comments you'd like to make >> thank you, commissioners and you know thank you to supervisor campos office and to hillary for the small business commission we're, of course, coming to this a little bit late in the game but the supervisor is very interested in the legislation and a big fan of the legislation we have a high catalyst of potentially

qualifying businesses in district 3 including a lot of hillary mexico's chinese owned legacy businesses as well i am happen to echo love what hillary commented about the approval i think we share the same skepticism and particularly questions to the financial viability of the businesses that sort of run counterintuitive for the purpose of funds and additionally you know to be the extent those questions radio going to be look at in a check list forum i indication caution we hope those that take a less view in the request of the application section 3 eligibility criteria the businesses can provide that narrative a losser form to make

the case why historical okay to be described in the exterior features that are significant about that legacy business so that narrative in the application should be given weight in the consideration and latest organizationaling hillary companions that supervisor campos will minimize the burden on the business and the burden on the commission to the extents that will involve a consent agenda for the positive recommendation and you know an actual hearing that allows the business owner to come and make their cases with a negative recommendation our office is in agreement with that type of process but we're happy to be

involved going forward and supervisor peskin we'll be in touch thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> commissioner hyland. >> since we'll take a break i was hoping that you could stick with us where we're on this taking public comment. >> i mean break for public comment not a literal break. >> we're now going to take new mexico public comment not a break but any public comment? please step forward. >> i thought you were going to take a break. >> desiree smith only on behalf of the san francisco heritage we're excited about that legacy business registry we have within working on if for a long time and the historic preservation commission has been looking this go issue for many years we're excited to be now in the implementation phase and

help assure a successful completion of the program and you know we've been since is legislation passes is in november we have seen inquires from businesses from other supervisors office and their seams to be some just a need for more information about how to go about registering interested businesses we're eager to see some perhaps information policeman's on the city website and supportive of the idea having staff in the planning department staff and/or the small business commission dedicated as a point of contact for the small businesses and in terms of hpc roll in the overall

process before we learned about is fact that hpc can't delegate the work by not delegate as much worker or with work to the planning department staff we whether endorse the plan b to have nomination on mac seeing before the health commission as and a they come up to be noomentdz as a possible in addition, we see the hpc and planning department staff can help to provide accident quality information to identify the character defining features and the physical buildings and of the cultural tradition of business themselves that kind of altogether historical information is helpful evaluation i think shelly mentioned a few

other things earlier so i think that evens our comments generally, we're existed about this. >> thank you of is there any additional public comment? >> and jonas i on a handout for us the heritage letter back to you, commissioners. >> i think we'll go through the recommendations by staff i have a number of comments. >> commissioner president lazarus. >> i have one question for hillary full-time i'm sorry it was regina. >> regina. >> that's okay. that's okay. >> you full-time employee as parts of the grant do we have a definition of what that is. >> i'm about in the process of completing that description. >> so i will send that over to

shelly for your review this position would handle the entire process. >> i'm sorry for the businesses and full-time. >> actually counting the individuals the presentation for the grants program for the business. >> yes. >> yes, so it is based on full-time virtuosity. >> which is. >> 4 part time equivalent is two. >> 35 hours being a full-time position. >> theo hours plus the blends so if you have folks working 15 hours 3 of them yeah. >> it is in the legislation itself so it is adding up the hours of the employees of the year before and dividing by 40 that's full-time. >> thank you. >> all right. thank you very

much i have some comments on the proposed methodology for how we will process or review those applications and first of all, i have a question let's say we choose to recommend going ahead with option two but not with option 4 if we find option 2 a cumbersome in 6 months decide this is not working well, we'll set a quarreling deadline for applications is that accurate we can change for the future. >> commission staff we right now the legislation says that the clock starts with the small business commission refers the application to the commission so it is set up we have to

review it on a immediately it is salon the application is received we can make a request at at the time to the small business commission they schedule those referrals. >> recent right in of most find this is not working with the small business commission has been they could put a quarterly dead on arrival on those applications work without so. >> that's right mined the small business commission can create preschools for the administration of both the funded and the registry those rules will be approved by the board of supervisors. >> i think commission if i may interject consider something were the small businesses under immeningitis treat therefore in for the able to responds theirs an opportunity to apply.

>> i guessed what aim recommending option 2 the immediate review for the foreseeable fire chief not like we're floated with mrnlts right now so seems that is the best way to proceed and the best way to currently paragraph in the legislation. >> if i think so this correctly with us needing to actually hear this and the small business referring it to us with the thirty day calendar if so challenging to meet the calendars before us i think that is probably a good idea to have hybrid where we can do it in a predictable manner so at least we know that first hearing of each quarter we'll be reviewing whatever one before us so the ones not you know critical imminent

condition. >> commissioners. >> yes. >> may i add or offer in the application process we can say that applications are submitted on the first thank you or by the monthly as a way to so there is exception for for those non-critical in terms of identifying up front in the application instructions you can see applications go to the historic preservation commission simulate from our office to your office on a specific dates so that i think it can workout well to try to work out well, that the timing of your staff being able to facilitate those and get overseeing scheduled so we can work on that.

>> okay. thank you. >> i i guess i'll recommend option two regardless if the option two we have a lot of complaisance and only thirty days from that point anyway. >> the staff has to review in a short periods this is a way to test the program to see if it is working if not we'll adjust is and regarding the check list on panning 4 i guess i'll recommend we take off the letter b example h example i work j, k and l and o i don't believe those are really things we as a historic preservation commission need to concern ourselves with repeat b, h, i can judicial committee,

k protect andudicial committee, k protect andal committee, k protect aommittee, k protect andmmittee, k protect aittee, k protect aittee, k protect atee, k protect ae, k protect andee, k protect a, k protect a, k protect a k protect andk protect a k protect and k protect and k protect andj k protect andl protect androtect andtect a aand o. >> this is giving points to things not have value those are any recommendations i see we have commissioner johnck. >> i was occurs about number 2 which i like that method or prefer that method the point being we want to get overseeing approved as as quickly as possible on a regular basis i think that's the message we wanted to send i was wondering dodo we have item place agenda with categories for minutes and do we have comments

from commissioners and, of course, a template i'm for consent calendar which i guess that's where they guess another template category or just uses the consent calendar. >> we'll use the consent calendar that's fine. >> and yeah, he agree with eliminating those wlerz how you - >> what we're trying to do. >> thank you commissioner hasz. >> thank you i do concur with commissioner president wolfram number 2 and the meeting of the alerted items stated and the only thing i'll ask that internally for staff keep track of the time spent perhaps and setting goals to facilitate everyone on staff knows we're trying to get it

done in thirty minutes i'm not kidding this is a lot of work and hearing complaints how along the process takes in general not just in preservation anyways i'd like see this streamlined so come with the first banish this is what we have we start setting goals. >> thank you commissioner hyland. >> out of this hearing weigh dodger do make many is recommendations and shelly will take back and have feedback from the small businesses and setting this up as far as the small business commission the feedback. >> i think in terms of how i

sorted see it or in terms of what goes back to the small business commission to report on what is the process what's the timing and what you have determined you're going to be looking at and reporting to them sort of an exception can comes from you i don't know if it is in the legislation to and the ordinance to say this small business commission has to approve exactly what you decide your structured to provide the recommendation if i making any sense so i think as i see them and understand it your decision on this criteria that you want to look at it and provide comment on and recommendation i'll report to them

i think for shelly and i and to me it is finalize what is good evening to be the communication structure i'm really interested in kind of with the first set of applications sitting down together to i have a good understanding of liv once we have a staff person in place to facilitate does that answer your question. >> sort of commission. >> i think we'll see how it plays out. >> if i can add i'll sawing as the next step premise a template

for the commission to review have a better sense of what the information they will be reviewing and in the comments could play with using around example of like a legacy business to flush out some of the information. >> thank you a couple of other things so i like the idea of honor consent calendar and recommend that will the case for the small businesses so send that out as a recommendation to them i don't think that k was intended - was intended to address the businesses at risk and have an issue are the lease or whatever on or abouts they may have and we already know the time that

shelly spent on this what did you do being budgeted we really would like some support in getting at least a half person if not a full-time person in the budget cycle yeah. >> before i take commissioner johns comment i'd like to remedy one item for the check list it is has a applicant or nominee are provided evidence they've contributed to the neighborhoods or community that is actually, the criteria wear as opposed to be looking at. >> that's way was going to is commissioner johns. >> thank you for doing this commissioner president wolfram the this has been bothering me i support your comment and placings comments about number 2 as the general direction within thing that is concerning me and

which i would like the city attorney view is putting these things on the consent calendar this is my concern is will that will running afoul of requirement that we can not delegate because usually the justification for as i understood it a consent calendar is that these are things that can be pretty much delegated to the staff we'll not look at them nonetheless a remarkable reason and if that is in fact the model then i'm concerned that we will be violating the legacy business registry legislation so that's a concern i have.

>> victor deputy city attorney thank you, commissioner not a problem because content items on the calendar where still acted by the commission and removed from the consent calendar if anyone worries about to do that take it off content an action item for you it still under you're not delegating our responsibility to make a determination thank you. >> commissioner matsuda. >> thank you commissioner president wolfram for adding that important area there let me say i had a comment about heritages letter i think that all the information is good but i'll encourage again we think about character defining features we broadened what is

currently defined as a character defining feature one of the main reasons we like this legislation and promote that not just to stay within the physical structure there are so many things before businesses that have been an ethic communities they're building didn't stand out no physical characteristic that can really, really show and appreciate what that business may mean to the communities i'll encourage you to when you are approach you're going to be the first face that people will see to repeating really encourage people to tell their stories and have a section westbound the application to help to define or help to articulate and as commissioner hyland said about the question of risk that i'm assuming you did that the question was put in here to

destine if a business is at risk i'll ask it within the application with you at risk and i know that is up to you to define the risk and move ahead we know that many legacy businesses in need of financial assistance that you know, i like the way it is set up which seem to be a cap in terms of how much time a person what reapply for year after year not sure you're putting in one but definitely recommend that priority given to businesses over landlords when you look at kind of the funding that will be available per year for that part of program. >> thank you, mr. fry. >> commissioners tim frye one thing will the legislation that

jumped out to her worth exploring it says that the applications that the commission didn't act upon westbound thirty days are essentially approved and one other option we have not thought about it it really is to minimize the burden on staff the commission and the applicant we could theoretically review the application and put them aside and let the thirty days go by and the ones with outstanding questions to you and place amongst our calendar that way it will clear out the majority of them but that does pose the issue not seeing the applications i'm not sure if so this is important especially, since the beginning of the program but again, a suggestion and if it is worth exploring the city attorney will look at it into that more and provide

advise to the future hearing. >> commissioner hasz. >> actually that leads into any question i'd like to see that he beginning the other stuff we delegated no matter it is called do the supervisors have the businesses ready to go prefunding we could do 5 or 10 samples or 10 businesses qualified or rejected or whatever even before it gets funded all to step in and get a couple examples. >> just to clarify supervisor campos made with an nomination already but we could this week make several more i know that supervisor peskin office is prepared and ready to clarify the legislation itself cigarette

for the grant program didn't begin until october 2015 to the application period between june and september 2016 and the first grants are dispersed in october technically into the legislation the grant program to the landlords to have started as soon as january 1st, 2016, but not a appropriation so our office is planning on introducing a supplemental shortly so that part of grant program will begin as soon as possible. >> thank you commissioner johns an interesting suggestion about the thirty day delay i'll be very, very strongly opposed to engaging in any such subterfuge that the historic preservation commission function on those things we review them

and if we then subvert that by saying we're not going to do anything that is a quasi of passing complexity in the admire election of our duty and it is offering i have it but also open up the program which i think has enormous benefits so i think we should do that alienating. >> any other comments or recommendations. >> i thought a june 30th deadline i was looking at for pr

so the grants from july one to june 30th for that fiscal year. >> right. >> >> great any other comments do we have given enough direction we're not making a motion on this reviewing the comment? and i think that is our final item so no additional comments we'll conclude this hearing

>> mta and parking commission ms. bloomer commissioner singh commissioner borden director heinecke director ramos director rubke mr. chairman director we have quorum item 3 electronic devices. any person responsible for disruption may be asked to leave the room. set cell phones on vibrate, the vibration could cause an interruption in the proceedings. please note that cells cause