to work. we don't know how it is going to fit in. i feel it may almost be unnecessary to have them and i wonder if a hiatus may be necessary for n.c.d. areas and commercial areas. so, thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. wooding. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. happy new year. it is great to be in front of you again. just as a reminder, my name is jennifer jones, i'm the executive director of the american institute of architects, san francisco chapters. and a chapters that represents over 2300 built environment professionals and architects in san francisco and marin counties. the aiasf public policy and advocacy company has lee yeahsed with the planning department for a considerable amount of time on these urban design guidelines.

and we reinforce our support of the adoption of the guidelines in march and any guidelines that provide clarity to our stakeholders and their clients and help alleviate some of the administrative cumbersome activitieses that you guys all have to face. and as well as in the planning department. clearly illustrated examples of the actual rules associated with planning in the city will immensely help our ark tex as well as those living and work and playing in san francisco, be able to continue to call this home. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> thank you. hello. my name is luco and i'm a architect practicing in san francisco and merry christmas of the a.i.a. i'm here to speak for myself as an architect. this version of the urban

design guidelines is strong in arctic lating things that every good architect considers. context, scale, texture and programme. these core issues give architects, project sponsors and planning a common language as we build the story about the buildings we are proposing. this could be a step toward a more consistent project review coming from the planning staff and a more consistent process, which we would all welcome. in particular, i appreciate that the urban design guidelines acknowledges that a building can and should express a clear organizing architectural idea. a driving spatial concept that consistentsly informs its sighting, organization, expression and details. the guidelines require that proposed projects have architectural integrity not just in terms of design but high production values as well. these are laudsable goals that we share as architects.

>> good afternoon. excuse me. good afternoon. i'm karen pacon, i'm an architect and member of the a.i.a. and practice here in san francisco and i'd like to reiterate everything that luke just said that i really appreciate as a design professional, the intent and the clear description in the design guidelines, the intents to promote good design and architectural integrity. through an understanding of context. and in the context of this vision of san francisco, the more presimentive requirements in the u.d.g.s seem a little bit out of place. sort of vestigial uses. for example, to avoid the use of dark materials on page 38 seems odd given the cultural

and racial diversity san francisco rightfully celebrates in all other aspects of civic life. as architects practicing in 2018, we aim to respect the past but also to reflect our present moment. we agree with the goal of new projects being compatible with their context and takes a lot of rigorous thinking to understand what context means. it's not prescriptive, per se. and so by that we don't agree that naive matching is the best way to achieve this. i wanted to add a word about the special area guidelines and with respect to david and the hard work that david is take on. and i know there are a lot of pulling and interests and i wonder if they're necessary and i just heard a number of people say we absolutely have to have them. we don't need u.d.g.s. but the draft in its current form seems to me like an overlay, which could

potentially devolve into prescriptive solutions and that is not really a good way to promote design that has its own internal integrity. so, i'm hoping that the urban design guidelines can speak for themselves with their emphasis on rigorous understanding of context. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commission. i'm an architect, member of the a.i.a., speaking for myself. i've been a practicing ark nekt san francisco for over 26 years. and generally speaking, myself and the a.i.a. are in support of the guidelineses. anything that can help provide clarity is beneficial to my profession and my clients. i think i support anything that simplifies the process and i would implore the staff to keep that in mind when they apply these guidelines that they are guidelines and they're there to improve the built environment. in my experience, the

guidelines often force bad buildings to stay bad buildings and that there has to be an allowance for creativesty of architects and improvement of the built environment over time and not just allow it to continue the way it has always been. we have to have progress and we have to allow creativity of good architects. for me, primarily, anything that will simplify this process, having worked here for a long time, it progressively gets more difficult and i would not support anything that adds to that complexity and difficulty of process. and i think that within the spirit of mayor lee's directive to the departmentses to try to simplify and streamline the process, that we should keep in mind that this change and any future changes to the r.d.g.s should keep in mind that it should be to help simplify and provide clarity. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is jack edwards.

good afternoon. i work with montgomery partners, owners of a number of medium-to-large rent controlled apartment buildings in san francisco. i spoke before you at the last hearing of the urban design guidelines on the topic of light wells. i pointed out that there were no guidelines requiring light wells, even though many of the areas in which u.s d.g.s would apply not only have light wells, but that those areas are characterized by large light wells often in lieu of code complied [inaudible]. this graphic here is the block of bush street near pine where we own a building. this block is typical of dozens and dozens of blocks in the market rc4 districts. many of these buildings, including ours, have a studio and one-bedroom units whose only windows are on a light well. often these units are occupied by low and moderate income te nranlsz. i was happy to hear that you asked for light well protection at the last hearing but disappointed that the department responded with a

guideline that requires, quote, matching light wells to at least 75% of the length of existing ones and similar depth, unquote. the zoning administrator has testified before you on many occasions that proposals tend to push proposed envelopes right up to the minimum requirements of the code. and so with a guideline that quanitifies 75%, we are sure to see new light wells, 25% smaller than existing adjacent light wells. light in the air will be severely decreeds. in some cases it will result in 100% blockage of light and air. so, while these people are low and moderate income in rent-controlled apartments and they're not able to pick up and move to a new home when they lose their light and air, i would like to suggest this rephrasing, and i'll change -- that quote, new light wells

should match existing adjacent ones in length and depth. or by also adding accept where at least less than 10% reduction of the proposed light wells size have no impasse on the light or air to any adjacent residential units. i think it is reasonable to require matching, but the staff insists there needs to be more flexibility -- [coughing] [inaudible] and our tenants will really suffer if they lose their light and air, which is going to happen when the new project goes up next door. thank you. >> thank you, mr. edwards. next speaker, please. ms. hester. >> two quick observations. i want to refer you to what the presentation was by the staff. and sitting in the audience, when you have a white on

colored, it's [inaudible]. right now, on the -- it's a tv shows black screen and white letters, legible. the guy before me had a presentation that was put up there and it is black letters on white. people that are really concerned about design should look to the documents that they're friending. white on pastel colours doesn't read. it doesn't read to the audience. it's really hard to follow it. really hard to follow it sitting in the audience. so, if you are going to be focusing on design, look to thyself, staff. you design products that come out to the commission are really hard to read. secondarily, about an hour before i came here, i got an e-mail from a person who had no idea about, but i knew the project.

and she was freaking out that the project was proposed and then mraiing department staff had gone through the 3-1-1 and was going to cut off the light to her rooms. and there was no attention paid to it because the staff did a 3-11. she said what do i do? what do i do? this is a valid consideration. there is existing housing on most of the lots and a new housing or new building hases to be looked at in terms of, a, are there existing tenants that are going to be displaced, that one that i talked about was also shadows and removal of existing tenants. the staff has to do a more thorough job. and not just dump it all on, oh, we can go and have a design consultation with the staff.

i'm seeing a lot of deficiencies in the communications. whoever is doing your graphics should go back to school and learn how to communicate to people. you don't have white on pastel and you -- [bell ringing] and you really have to pay attention to tenants and shadows. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please, ms. gallagher. >> commissioners, good afternoon and happy new year. for your record, mary gallagher. in some prior administrations, there was a general rule that if the commission wanted something done in between the regular budget cycle that wasn't already in the approved work programme, and it was going to take a threshhold of certain amount of dollars, then that item would come back to the commission for discussion. on its work programme. this is because the commission is charged in the charter with responsibility of the budget and a budget is meaningless, unless every dollar is tied to

a work programme, goals and timelines. so, you asked for guidelines, design guidelines in the petrero and one other areas. have the staff bring a proposed work programme to the commission and said, well, you know instead of producing fine-tuned design guidelines for any specific neighbourhood, instead we're going to produce broadside of design statements for the entire city. we'll pull some of the properties out of the r.d.g.s, we'll introduce some conflicts like light rails between the r.d.g.s and u.d.g.s and allow developers to get out of the guidelines if they produce something we like better at the moment. by the way, we won't let any neighbourhood groups in to be involved with the initial design of the guidelines. that proposal would have gone over like a lead brick. yet toot u.d.g. proposals were conceived in kind of the same format. and it's proposed for adoption today with overlay of new neighbourhood guidelines that, unfortunately, aren't more specific than the u.d.g.s

themselves. it's still pulling six unit or more buildings out of the r.d.g.s. it's still covers, korkts the maps anyway, historic districts even though it is not presentation-relate and covers areas like the upper market that already have really good fine grain design guidelines and also still lacks enough detail to help you actually review projects in the petrero and elsewhere. the general naurltsz of these policies opens the door to actually what polls developers and neighbourhoods alike don't want and that is vagueness. and these policies also tend to focus on what is going on within the lot as opposed to and at the expense of what's going on around it. i was like one of the other speakers, happy to see a couple of specific design guidelines added since last time. like light wells and then aghast to see the new minimum standard, which is the most -- the only standard the developers ever made the minimum standards. at 75% matching.

in other words, they aren't going to be matching. this, i thought, was more evidence that the policies do not emphasize or fully address the existing environment. if knollsing comes out of this hearing, i hope you'll at least ask the department to produce a design review checklist from the u.s d.g.s and then start sending them to you with each subsequent petrero project. this is the only way you'll know if these work for you or not. there's been nothing from standing in the way of departments from doing that on a trial basis for the last two years. if you like how it works, then adopt it for the petrero. [bell ringing] thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> is the overhead on? >> it can be. >> once you place something

down, sfgov tv will go to it. >> ok. thanks. good afternoon. and happy new year. lisa fromer, liberty hill. after two years, it's gratifying to see that the u.d.g. is not the overarching city-wide guideline. and all waivers have been deleted. but it's vague generalities and modern bent still won't guide development that in any way complements our older residential or historic neighbourhoods. many eastern and downtown districts and other neighbourhoods already have their own very granular-specific guidelines. an appendix in the first version of the u.d.g.s listed 33 of them. the latest draft now applis to the neighbourhood commercial corridors. that's the residential commercial interface that has always been part of the residential fabric. the r.d.g. has the detail and

granularity to inform design here and includes historic preservation but not u.d.g. there is nothing in the u.d.g. that speaks to light air privacy. and now there is a little more on light wells. the reason it's up to neighbourhoods to write their own special area guidelines for their n.c.d.s is neither necessary or advisable. worst of all tu.d.g. is being applied to historic district. our recent request for exemption was turned down. liberty hill, like the other 12 landmark districts, has its own guidelines in article 10 and all the historic districts have the historic preservation guidelines using the secretary of the interior standards. sensitivity and real specifics are required to preserve our historic neighbourhoods. here's an example from the

western soma design guidelines. overhead, please. it addresses development around historic and potentially historic buildings to preserve the overall historic character of the neighbourhood. [bell ringing] nothing in the u.d.g. even comes close. that's why historic districts must be exempt. i can't say that strongly enough. the time tested r.d.g.s, article 10, historic preservation guidelines and existing specific guidelines all work well for our neighbourhoods and historic districts. they address preservation, not modernization. but for areas like petrero that apparently need design guidelines, the u.d.g. is a nice fit. [bell ringing] thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon. my name is reesa titlebalm. i remember in 1981 when a small group of people got together to develop a committee to research our neighbourhood and in 1984 i became president of what is now called the liberty hill historic district. over the last 37 years, i've been a neighbourhood activist and i'ves been very, very strongly working towards preservation as we modernize for this time. we have seen many different plans come and go. i have been in this room many times. and i don't think that there is

anything more valuable than people who are living in the neighbourhood who know what's going on. right now, we have valencia street that is called a transit corridor and there is no transit on valencia street. all the buses have been eliminated. in addition, it's very, very important to understand that in our neighbourhood, the commercial areas are largely residential. and according to a realtor, recently, he is saying that all the residential neighbourhoods are really part of this commercial district. the commercial districts do have to reinvent themselves for the modern reality. [coughing] amazon, google and we can see on valencia street that there

are a great number of vacancies. guidelines need to be responsible and responsive to each neighbourhood's identity. in liberty hill, we have a responsibility to preserve our significant architecture and our streetscapes. the u.d.g. should not be applied in our historic district. they simply do not relate to our specific concerns for preservation as we work towards the future. we hope you'll exempt the historic districts from this plan which really has no specifics and is very vague on the details. [bell ringing] i find that many of the qualities that are mentioned are so subject to interpretation that they cannot be considered. thank you. [please stand by] [please stand by]

and it's a risky proposition. the last quote over time and there's layers that uphold san francisco's unique neighborhoods and support their evolution. i ask you whose to decide just what appropriate design is and wed like historic districts have the urban design guidelines. >> commissioner: thank you, next

speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. earlier when the department unveiled the first draft of the documented public at large and i told you the issues with the guidelines chief among them was the over arching aspect to apply to san francisco. why? we found the focus was mostly on high-density areas with high rise buildings. we also found a waiver unacceptable. it was compounded by the fact the guidelines in the document was ambiguous and left a lot of room for interpretation. and it doesn't show the clarity such as the r.d.g. standards and

they finally did away with waivers and exceptions months ago. we applaud the staff for making the changes. however, the fact remains the guidelines will still apply to units with six-plus units, the neighborhood commercial districts and above all the historic districts and they were supposed to exclude and be barred from applying. the department's response has been special area design guidelines. we were initially receptive to this concept then we found out the two special area design guidelines the department had been working with the neighborhoods were suffering from the same problems that we discovered with the urban design guidelines. namely ambiguity and lack of

substance. here's my question, why write a set of vague and ambiguous statements to supercede details and when challenged with the soundness of this approach promise more guidelines to come. it looks like re-inventing the wheel. the truth is we have excellent guidelines even for high density eastern neighborhoods. yes, there are areas that need guidelines like potrero and we don't deny that. so why use these guidelines for the entire city when you can just use it for potrero? why not redesign the urban design guidelines and call it potrero design guidelines and use the city with substantial guidelines to continue with what they have. here's an example of the standards that supports my point. overhead, please.

as you can see -- well, out of time. >> commissioner: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, afternoon, commissioners, thank you for opportunity to speak on the guidelines. that the process were revised it could become shorter and more effective. the absence of the owner and architect during the initial review may greatly delay the process provoking an appeal. no matter how competent a case planner's presentation may, an unexpected question about non conformance with with the guidelines may not be ac --

adequately answered and the explanation may be a welcomed surprise to the reviewers. here's how you can do it. part one, a typical case planner is made in the absence of design architect and owner. he questions whose answers concern non-conformance with the guidelines are listed for a later discussion during part two when the architect and owner are invited into the discussion. part two. the meeting is then opened to the owner and architect for a face to face limited opportunity to respond to udat's key guideline questions after which they reconvene to the private meeting to formulate the udat report. thank you very much.

>> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm mc mars. i'm an artist, a writer. i live in the 800 block of bush street. i'm here to address something just alluded to earlier by jack edwards representing montgomery partners. he talked about the building being proposed next door to where we live and that building will effectively remove somebody like me from the city. i wrote a book called don't take me the long ways. i was also the -- i'm one of the

people san francisco points to and i'm one of the artists creating the hard work in san francisco and i'm retired and live next door to a building that is about to be re-c re-configured. they're planning a six-story building adjacent to my wall that will prevent me from writing with the noise level and be a detriment to the neighborhood and destroy the human ecology. to define that term quickly, how people live within the particular. all the subtle aspects of keeping the neighborhood intact. one artist spoke about context.

i'm just a concerned citizen that feels suddenly in the crosshairs of the developers and i want you to understand that. >> i wanted to sum up a consensus of those speaking and it seems to be as follows. u.d.g.s are not ready for prime time and not widely supported.

they're viewed as vague and providing an open season on developers doing pretty much what they want. there seems to be support for voluntary neighborhood guidelines using crucibles to start the process such as north beach and middle pollack. however, they should initially be developed by the neighborhoods themselves, presented to staff and then considered with major community input. what should not happen and what seems to have happened to date is preparation of the initial drafts by the staff with little or no input with very vague guidelines which then default to equally vague universal guidelines. to these ends then, u.d.g. should be taken off calendar indefinitely. pending the results of progress, if any, and developing the

neighborhood guidelines which are to date, as far as i know north beach and middle pole -- polk. the universal guidelines are vague and the ones prepared by staff with virtually no input when the neighborhoods offered to do their own first versions and were told no are not adequate. thanks very much. >> thank you, mr. weber. any additional public comment on this item? seeing none we'll close public comment. >> if i can submit something for sunshine. >> commissioner: thank you. we'll open it up to commissioner comments. any questions?

commissioner moore. >> i have a cold so i'll try to speak concisely. we have not looked at the guidelines for quite some time and we've been standing on the sidelines watching the process and communication and interaction and community and have clearly heard today that many of the initiatives which have happened between us have only partially led to what we have all seen potential. when i last heard about the process was when specific neighborhoods were going to interact with staff and staff drafting and there was a suggestion as basically a road map for what planning would do to integrate them into process

by the urban design guidelines. from what i hear today, the process has started apparently with people smiling and walking down the street together. and i don't have a horse in the race because i am not participating but there seems to be goals and i hear the contrary. it seems people have not found themselves heard or accepted for the specifics of what they're asking. i remember someone saying we had 24 specific points and 10 were answered. i'm not taking sides, i'm repeating what i heard. i acknowledge the creation of

guidelines is complicated. i don't believe the document between today and yesterday is simpler. it's been almost two days which is far longer than i like to spend on any commission matter with seven or eight days notice to prepare to read through the duks and i have sticky notes and i will not even started touching on them exempt i experienced the large disconnect between what certain people call vagueness and policy and over arcing themes from the guidelines we have to how we take them and

define our future. i have seen positive points but overall because the document has become so complex i don't see what i personally have expected. the tie into the general plan and design urban development and the specific guidelines, i do not see this and perhaps it's n organized and the captions i don't understand but i'm at a loss it's not simpler or clearer but it's become more complicated and confusing for me.

>> commissioner: commissioner melgar. >> i want to thank the staff for a thorough presentation and to the many folks who came out today to give their feedback and took the time to look over all the stuff and follow the process. i think that's how it's supposed to work and thank you for all the energy you've put into it. i guess i had more questions than some of this is still fuzzy to me and it sounds like fuzzy to other too. so perhaps if we go through the process and work with community folks and incorporate their feedback it will become clear tore all. but specifically i was looking at the areas that you had

specified in terms of greater detail and specific design. paris, flat iron buildings so i'm not sure. how are those areas selected and i'm unclear about how -- >> how were they selected? >> they were select the people who showed up and acted most interested in our efforts and wanted to have more substantial dialogue with us. >> that worries me a little bit. not everyone is with it. i was looking at your map of where the urban design guidelines will apply and chinatown, 24th street, the third street corridor are all areas that have worked as communities for a while on cultural preservation and

signage, murals, physical markers of space and culture and i'm wondering how these relate to that and -- >> let me clarify this because those two are select as the prototype start. we intend to keep going and san francisco is full of neighborhoods with lots of active people and that will probably reach out to us with modest advertising on our part and we recognize places like chinatown we may have to be more proactive in saying we're here and here to meet the needs of your communities too and provide technical assistance and design guidelines and basically engage them. >> i heard the overall messages we intend to provide clarity and

at the same time they were intended to make sure that design supported context so that will include neighborhood context that is different but i want to make sure in the process we acknowledge the disparity and go out of our way to state it because i know this department has spent a lot of time on map 2020 and the chinatown design and third street to make sure that's acknowledged. thank you. >> commissioner: i want to mention we have a meeting specifically about starting. they would be next in line. they're third in line. we started the conversation and set up site visits already in support of now 2020 and as a

special area design guideline. >> just three and four months ago we had a presentation from the chinatown folks and i want to make sure that we state had we're supporting the ongoing efforts. >> and our last public workship -- workship from a member in china and we're going to connect them with the sustainability district and offer support to that but i know there's been an ongoing project already. >> commissioner: thank you. >> commissioner: commissioner richards. >> there's a lot here i like and a lot of hard work went into this. i think it needs to move forward appropriately now. if we look at the man, everything looks like mission

bay and it's bland and you don't know where you're at and everything looks the same. it would apply to what would be pretty much be all the orange which is a significant portion of the map, right. we added most of market stop and around on fisherman's wharf and added up the commercial districts where there was 40 of them or something like that. we said let's make it bigger, we're doing a good thing and i

hear with the thin orange lines out in the neighborhoods because my neighborhood is special, her neighborhood's special, his neighborhood's special, every neighborhood is special and every neighborhood is unique and why the city's known as the city of neighborhoods. a couple things i remember talking about the concern i'm hearing sit doesn't supplant anything but it supplants everything. i'm hearing bipolar arguments. i asked for this and if it's in my e-mail, i apologize, there's thousand unreads in there. but what do we have in design guidelines from the most broad to specific so people can visualize and say if we're doing on wern -- western sow ma --

soma this would apply. so when you drop your quarter in and it drops through the pegs and this is what we'll use. that would help people because they're still trying to grab on to what they know. i think this could augment it better and i think that's needed. woe should clearly mark what's on the project so if it's a church we say it's a u.d.g. let's just call it for what it is. the unknown is creating a fear of what could happen and people are -- we have this with the

r.e.t. and maybe it wasn't perfect, but over my dead body we're having another r.e.t. here because we need them in one way, shape or form around the city. we need to do more work though. and i have a challenge of all the people and of everyone that spoke, i want to -- and an asked because i sometimes have a hard time getting my mind wrapped around the pages and there's so much stuff and it's mind numbing and i'm just a finance guy that likes good looking things. there's some buildings in 24th street we approved the demolition of a single-story

house next to the mystery book store. some boxy building went in. if you reversed engineered it would the building look like it does now because they're dead wringers for what we got or have gotten something different because it skipped over these things, that would help some people. conversely, down the street where we approved one of those health right things with the flu and cold and there's a building we use as this is what we don't want to have happen in 24th street. i'd have the a.i.a. go out and go through the sausage grind and

see how do you both interpret what they are. if there's a gap it would come out in that. i want to see what that looks like. i think the project come before us we need a checklist. it puts it down on paper and tells what the department think. as somebody else has a process change with how things get evaluated, i think with this

document, this is 75%, but changing the process a little bit so you have a change in the team you talk and the architect explains it and there's a checklist there and you work from the same checklist rather than concepts. that would be great and would clarify, we might disagree but this is why we disagree. the department's determination should be in our packet. and i've said that since we started doing this. sometimes we get a design on a building up here and i think of many of them. we can put them through the sausage mill too across from the sailor's hall on top of the mill and we can go over 10 of them and say what happened here. that would be a helpful thing.

one would be on van ness and green and we wanted to put the steps down to van ness street. it was last month. commissioner moore said it's too coppery looking. there's things we can learn in how the things would work. more specific things, for districts to cover a quarter of a percent of all the land in the city. it's tiny, actual historic districts. there's 350,000 parcels. i don't think there's any big historic district i can read war and peace driving through but as a kid i'd be able to read war and peace from one end to the other because it's so along. historic districts are a big point of con sense. if we take them out does it

matter? i've seen interesting things in europe where i would have never have dreamed them. but if that's going to help get people to rally behind the steps, great. two more things, first. the whole parity issue, sit 25%, 10 -- is it 25% difference or 10%. where do we use 10% and 25%. we'll use 25% on shrinking units and we had policies where we said don't do that, that's too much and 10% is where it's within 10% of conformance.

i think we're closer to 10% to a parity issue. it seems more reasonable than 25%. because 25% brings more unintended consequences like blocking somebody's light. 10% seems to be something anybody can always get around and not pose a huge challenge to the developer. i think the elephant in the room here is density bonus. those programs as we struggle with goes against what's in here. and we could have simplified lots and we can do a density bonus. suddenly, it goes out the window because we don't have much of a choice on a density bonus where this is what they can get and as

we saw in 2019 mission and he said i'm doing what i want and we tweaked it 5% because that's all we were allowed and gave them the exceptions what we were asking for and what is the effect on projects and how do we handle those if one comes our way. i think there's some in the hopper and we should be able to have a special track for them to guide the developer to doing the right thing. there's a lot here. great work. i want to move it forward but we have some tweaking to do. >> commissioner: i think we've made progress but i think people are still defensive about these. staff and neighborhood groups. i think you've made good progress and and i think some of the new buildings here are

wonderful and we tend to get criticized for what's coming and what's being built and have projects here. i think these are meant to be somewhat vague and inspirational and picking the better elements of what's being built and what's here out and showing -- trying to inspire design professionals and architects and developers and neighbors to have development that meets some of the criteria that are here. i know i live off the divi divisiderro corridor. i like the overlay in some neighborhoods i don't know if it's necessary.

there's things that are unique about chinatown and hayes valley in north beach. i think it's fairly typical. i think it would be more tamping down the orientation of that spreet. -- spretreet. we got a lot on process and specifics. maybe if it's a stairwell we shouldn't try to match it but getting that specific we should

match when those are inhabited apartments or units there. so i think that's the way you want to go. you want to make them more inspiring and take elements of what we think is great about the city and neighborhoods and about projects and hoping we can encourage that to happen in future developments. a question about where they apply when there's existing and there's western soma. what happens when they get together? >> the urban design guidelines are at the bottom of the stack. we have the historics district design guidelines and design guidelines. the top o