>> i would like to remind members of the public that the commission does not tolerate any disruption or outbursts of any kind. please silence your mobile devices that may sound off during these proceedings. when speaking before the commission, state your name for the speak during general

public comment? >> would you like to speak on an item that's not agendaized? >> if you would like to speak to a non-agendaized item, come forward. seeing none, i'm closing public comment. >> that will bring us to item number one. >> no former announcement this afternoon, but happy to forward any questions or comments you

may have for him for another hearing. >> seeing none, we can move on to item two, review of staff. >> good afternoon. no former planning commission report, however, a few items that the board of supervisors. market hall on the intersection of church and market street, they've finally made it through the landmark designation process at the full board. so that was heard last week, and i believe had its final reading. it now moves on to signature from the mayor. the diamond heights safety sculpture also was heard at the land-use committee. there was some question from the department of public works and the committee members regarding the ownership of the structure. staff was able to confirm that, in fact, the redevelopment agency had gifted the property

to the city and that it's under dpw's jurisdiction. we're going to have a meeting in the next couple weeks just to talk about next steps. our understanding is department of public works would like a structural engineer to go out and look at the sculpture and really figure out if there are any immediate issues that need to be addressed sooner rather than later. once that meeting take place, then we have more information on the structural integrity of the safety wall, it will likely move to the full board for a vote. also, i wanted to update you on one remaining application. this morning i was at the government audit and oversight committee for 6262carmelita street. one of the remaining applications that was postponed last november. due to concerns from the

committee over the owner move-in eviction that had previously taken place at that location. the department was able to provide the committee members with additional information and also to demonstrate that the owner movement eviction did not involve tenants of a protected class. the appropriate owners, in addition to supervisor sheehy's office was in attendance at the committee meeting this morning. the committee members felt satisfied with the level of information we provided regarding the owner move-in eviction. they did state that they would prefer to receive that information as part of their case packet for future contract considerations. i'm not sure how it's going to work in the future applications, but ultimately, they forwarded a positive recommendation to support that contract.

that will move forward to the board of supervisors next week. and then, finally, just to give you a heads-up, this week a member of the public filed an appeal on the certificate of appropriateness for the removal of the early day sculpture from the pioneer monument. that will move to the board of appeals. that's set for the 19th where the department will present on the commission's action. based on our quick reading of the appeal documentation, the appellant does not believe removing the sculpture meets the standards. we're happy to share that report with you, if you're interested. >> could i ask a question about that? >> sure. >> i thought the path was from the historic commission to the board of supervisors. >> it went back to the arts commission. >> the arts commission has to move through a formal process. >> i mean in terms of appeal.

i thought appeals of our decisions -- >> only when they're coupled with a conditional use authorization or another entitlement. if there's no other entitlement involved, it goes directly to the court of appeals. that concludes my statements. >> we had the discussion on our agenda, and it was continued. is that going to come back soon? >> it is. we're currently working with the city attorney's office on revised language for you to consider. once we have that ready, hopefully we'll bring that back to you in the next couple of minutes. >> seeing nothing else, we'll move on. >> i'm delighted to welcome our commissioner keith black to our commission. welcome. glad to have you. >> welcome. >> very happy to be here. >> draft minutes for the regular

hearing of march 7th, 2018. >> commissioners, any comments on the draft minutes? at this time, we'll take public comment on the draft minutes for march 7th, 2018. does any member of the public wish to comment on this item? if so, come forward. seeing none, we'll close this public comment.

commissioners, we will place this under consideration. item 6, 2615.

660 oak street landmark designation is proposed to continue to april 18, 2018. under the regular calendar, item 10-e for the minute mission conservation district designation is proposed for continuance to april 18. i have no other items proposed for continuance and no speaker cards. >> commissioner pearlman. >> i want to ask about the continuance for 554 fillmore street that we continue it indefinitely until we have some resolution on the project that is being proposed there. >> can we, i guess we could make

that as a motion. >> you can make any motion you like if you would like to continue it indefinitely. >> we will take public comment on the continuance of these two items. any member of the public wish to speak to these? if so, please come forward. >> on behalf of 554 fillmore street in agreement about the inful continuance. we are in favour of that. we hope you can move forward with that. >> any other member of the public wish to comment? >> we will close public comment. >> i had a question on the indefinitely which sounds like a good idea. otherwise it keeps reappearing every two weeks or something like that, right. >> that is correct. the noticing requirements for the designation only occur at the second hearing that you have so that would be the only notice that would be affected. >> thank you.

>> is it clear what the project sponsor needs to do to get it back on the calendar? >> for those not at the arc we did see the project presented today. they have made huge strides into bringing the project closer to conformance, but there are still a number of items we want to talk about relative to the character defining features to perhaps make the project more compatible or make it easier to meet requirements once it becomes a landmark, but if we go through the process of land marking it with the current status of the character defining features, the project would be a dead issue. i would rather, the project has

been moving forward. i don't want to stop that process. if we hold off until the project and the department and you know there is some agreement as to what that is, then it will be easier to step forward with landmarking. >> commissioner pearlman do you want to make a motion. >> motion to continue you this with 554 fillmore to indefinite status. >> 10e would be continued until april 18th. >> very good, commissioners on that motion. >> is there a second. >> thank you. continue item 6 and item 10-e commissioner black.

(roll call). >> so moved that motion passes unanimously seven to 0. place this case no. 2018-35267 third street. >> today you only have one business application for the jazz room located on third street in the bayview neighbourhood. the jazz room opened in 1962 officially, although it appears there are some newspaper articles to indicate it may have existed in a different location in the neighbourhood prior to that, as early as 1960. the jazz room has been in the same family ownership since 1964. for the majority of the existence and the business is also sited in the draft

african-american historical context statement as one of primary businesses on third street. the features recommended by the applicant and staff for safe guarding with the live performance space, layout and signage and awning. that concludes my presentation. i am not sure if the business owner is here today to present or not. >> thank you. at this time we will have public comment. any member of the public wish to speak? please come forward. you will have three minutes. there will be a warning buzzer 30 seconds. >> i will not take three minutes. this is a no-brainer. i am co ellington. bayview native. for context the jazz room are prime examples of what we want in the community.

i'm sure you are familiar with the declining african-american population in bayview. there are efforts to preserve a lot of the culture in bayview, and this is at the core one of the long lasting businesses that has stood strong in the neighborhood. there is a real unique thing happening now where the african business owners are starting to come together and align. it is something really special that i'm proud to be part of. we are starting to see the preservation efforts combined with welcoming the new resident to the neighbourhood so they understand the culture that has cultivated in the neighbourhood for them. i will leave it at that. i urge you all to move this forward. >> thank you.

>> i am the corridor manager for the third street room. the owner of the jazz room is working today. she is behind the bar today as we speak as shetends to open the establishment. seven years ago when i first moved to third and oakdale, i wondered around the neighbourhood. the jazz room was one of the first places i walked into. it was chubby checker night. they were doing the twist live. i had a soft spot in my heart. miss bernadette ask an icon. three years ago the economic development on third recognized the importance of the jazz room and its bringing music into the area. we started and this will be the third annual butcher town jazz festival. we close out the street behind

the jazz room and have live jazz performances. this is our third year. i would invite all commissioners to join us. i hope you will pass this. reappreciate your service to san francisco. thank you. >> when is it? >> the second sunday, i think the 12th of october. i will send you a personal invite. >> any other member of the public wish to comment? seeing and hearing none we will close public comment. >> it is great to hear the testimony and to hear the context what is happening in the corridor. that is great. thank you. this istethis is terrific. send the invitation to all of us. i move approval of this legacy application for the jazz room. >> there is nothing further. i have a motion to adopt the recommendation for approval for

the legacy application. (roll call). >> so moved commissioners that motion passes unanimously 7-0. >> congratulations. >> item 8, 2015coa the third street bridge certificate of appropriateness. >> good afternoon, commissioners. the president-elect is -- project is a certificate of appropriateness. the property is okay you b is ps pro pos to rehabilitate to maintain the integrity of the structure. the proposed project entails repair and replacement of the steel bridge members. repair of the concrete piles and

steel stairway, replacement of the existing deck, repainting and recoating of the bridge and installation of one traffic control gate and one pedestrian gate. it will require scaffolding and containment system. department staff recommends approval with conditions and finds it is consistent with the requirements of article 10. to ensure the work is undertaken in conformance with the certificate, staff recommends the following conditions. 1. prior to coating and painting the project shall submit paint samples to verify the paint choice and finish. 2. prior to commencement of construction the project shall consult with the engineer that meets the min qualifications of the standards to conduct peer

review of the proposed work including review of stabilization and monitoring plan, final inspection report and structural steel coating. it shall provide information and qualifications for the selected historic engineer, consultant to the preservation staff to demonstrate compliance. 3. prior to construction they shall submit a monitoring plan reviewed and verified by the historic engineer to the preservation staff. the report shall provide a construction monitoring plan to monitor vibration at the operator's house and watch man's house to ensure any damage is minimized and repaired to existing conditions. it shall include preand post condition and the high threshold of vibration and quarterly

results with accompanying fought thes. 4. there shall be a final inspection to the staff that has been reviewed and verified by the engineer consultant. the report shall provide a final percentage every placement based on weight of the existing bring. if 25% or more of the total waste of the bridge must be replaced. they shall return for review and approval of expanded replacement project under a new certificate. it has prepared a short presentation. i am available for presentation. this concludes my presentation. >> thank you. >> how much time? 10 minutes? is that enough? okay. 10.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. thank you for giving us the opportunity to present the project. my name is thomas roitnman project works for the rehabilitation project. just to continue on what the planning department's presentation discussed about maintaining this landmark structure, i wanted to show a couple pictures if we can do the powerpoint. depending how familiar you are

with the project, the bridge was constructed in 1933. here is a couple photos from opening day and subsequent photos showing the condition of the bridge, and what i would like to emphasize is the scope of our project is not to change the bridge but rather to repair and maintain the bridge because it is subject to continual deterioration in the saltwater environment, and there is an ongoing need to repair it. it has been repaired many times over its lifespan, and in this case we have an opportunity to do a comprehensive repair to many items that have exhibited corrosion and other deterioration. i just wanted to show you a few photos of the deteriorated conditions. here is an example of one of the

main base plates. you can see significant rust and another condition where the corrosion is in need every pair -- of the repair. you can see the deck corrosion and deterioration of the concrete curb. this is some examples where there is missing bolts. here is a fairly typical example where the steel member has been bent, hit or it has been corroded and needs to be essentially restored by bending it back to its original position and repainted. this is a top view looking at the bridge. i don't have anything else to

discuss other than i am here to answer any questions you may have about the project. >> commissioners, any questions for the project sponsor? thank you. commissioner highland. >> thank you. what about the colour of the coating? is that -- do you have any intention or direction what you are thinking as far as the colour of the coating? is that in our purview? >> we have done some archival search and inquired with people involved in the bridge. >> we have added condition of approval to have the project sponsor come back to us with paint sample and finishes. to my understanding, the bridge was sand blasted in the 1990s. there is no possibility of paint

analysis of the historic colour and depending on the photographs it is not going to help with the colour. we are going to ask the project sponsor to review the articles or other bridges to figure out if there is a consistent colour and come back with us with that information. >> do you have any information or direction that you are thinking? >> part of the requirement which we have been involved is engaging this historic architect to do whatever kind of archival research to most closely derm what that original colour is. the bridge has been repainted numerous times, but we do have some photos and information from people that have been with the bridge for a long time, and

there is information about the bridge has always been black, what shade of black we will work with that consultant on determining what that colour should be most closely to meet with the original intent. >> thank you. >> i was curious about the process. i remember reading several months ago the report that accompanies the category cal exemption. b.c. dc did you get a permit from the baconservation development commission? >> yes. >> did the review board did it go through as well? >> the review board? it is the engineering board for the baconservation development commission. >> i was curious because of the

historic engineer. i realize this has come under section 106 consultation. apparently our review as part of more information on evaluating the historic compatibility of the repair with our historic preservation goals. i am interested in other opinions on the historic aspects as well as safety. >> just to add to this, the project is federally funded in part by the federal highway bridge repair program, and they have the requirement of meeting the secretary of the interior standards for the least invasive method to repair the paint. those are employed as part of the design specifications, i'm not sure if that answers your question?

>> i was lookingaticly discussion about the -- looking at discussion of the weight. i have to congratulate the public works department. there is a fantastic video on the bridge which talks about the historic aspect of it and the value of that. i support everything that we are doing here. i was more curious about the process and where else this has gone. >> i think to talk about the weight, to reiterate that we are doing the minimum amount of changing of any steel members. it is mainly stripping down the corrosion and repairing it. to the experience of someone seeing bridge or driving across it, it is virtually exactly as is. >> identical, right. >> commissioner pearlman. >> i wanted to pick out the question. the condition of approval about getting to 25%, then com come bk

to go through the process again. are you anywhere near an 25%? what what you are saying it is not nearly that significant. >> it is very incidental. we are looking at approximately less than 1%. these are only members so far deteriorated that they need pieces of steel to replace the corroded members. most is stripping and painting. the steel deck, depending how you count that weight amounts to 13% of the total weight of the bridge. that decking if i can go back to photo. here is a closeup. replacement decking is in the same shape as the existing so it is just a new version of the same exact decking. in terms of changed members, it would be well under that

threshold. >> if you were close it seems like a lot of work to come back for another certificate of appropriateness if you are at 25.5%. that will probably not kick in. >> we expect that we will find areas not perfectly reflected on the drawings right now, but those should be a minimal amount of extra from what is shown. i don't think we will be back for that. >> thank you. >> at this time we will take public comment. does any member of the public wish to speak? if so please come forward. seeing none we close. >> i move we approve this and move forward with the conditions of approval. >> second. >> very good, commissioners. there is a motion seconded to approve the matter with conditions. commissionecommission black.

(roll call). so moved commissioners, that motion passes 7-0. in the case of items 9a, b, c, to 2011.1356m, t, z, for amendments to the codes and amendments to the zoning map. >> good afternoon. john ram with the planning department. commissioner black, welcome. we look forward to working with you. i am sorry your first day on the job we had this massive document. we are here to talk about the central soma plan. it is the third oldest of the three children. he ask at this for seven years. we are at the stage where the soma plan is getting ready for adoption. we initiated that at the planning commission two weeks

ago. we are presenting to you the preservation. no review of the plan but with the particular focus on the preservation related aspects of the plan. i will say this plan grew out of a lot of thinking out of the past with the eastern neighbourhoods plan, in particular this plan grew out of the notion we should take a special look at the area around the fourth street subway line and rethinking that as the place that would be a location for higher density concentration of jobs and housing. there has been a lot of discussion in the media in the past few months about that balance between jobs and housing. you probably heard about that. it calls for 7,000 units of housing minimum and several million square feet of office space. the reason for the office space is, number one, the downtown area is largely built out. there are very few sites left for office.

second with the relationship with transit it is a great place to concentrate jobs for the future. this is a 25 year plan. we are looking at the future. the city zones is such that only 10% of the city allows office. 90% allows housing. there are few places to think about future job growth in the city. this is one because of the good transit access and good highway access. for those reasons this plan is a good package and steve will tell you about the public benefits that accrue much like the transit centre plan there will be benefits for years to come. i am happy to have a discussion. i have to leave in a half hour if this goes that long. i will let steve make the presentation. thank you. >> good afternoon,

commissioners. the project manager for the central soma plan. thank you for the opportunity to speak today. the purpose is to present to you the plan and make sure we get your feedback for the planning commission and the board of supervisors. john mentioned we have been at this for a long time. the birth of my kids to this calendar. we have been working on it since 2011. in 2013 we released the first version. 2016 we released the second version of the plan. the end of that year released the completed draft. february 27 this year mayor and supervisor introduced the zoning amendments for the plan. march 1st it was the general plan amendments. the goals to act on april 12 or soon there after then to the

board oboardboard oboard of sup. i will turnaround your comments and present it to them. before launching to the details i want to emphasize the things we have done around public outreach to go to information for the plan. this is a reflection of thousands of conversations over the seven years. we talked to the community stakeholders, tenants, nonprofits, talked with all the relevant city and regional agencies, mta and puc and oawd and the recpark and meetings and surveys and a ton of one-on-one conversations. i want to continue to thank the members of the community participating to help shape the future of the neighbourhood.

to reiterate what john said why we are doing the plan, the problem is high growth demand causing social economic and environmental issues. it is a great place to live, great jobs, high-quality of life, great society, great environment. jobs are moving here. we know that and that is causing a lot of strain on our housing stock and economic gentrification. we have not had space for these places to go. if we don't accommodate the demand the price will go up to cause strain on us physically and socially. this is to be part of that larger solution. iit is a central place for the growth that wants to be here.

neighborhood. the plan's vision is to create a sustainable enabled and the needs are to meet their needs and sustainable in all the ways we like to think about, socially, environmentallienedald economically. keep what is great and fix what is not. there are a lot of great things about this neighborhood. the people that live there. the kinds of jobs that are there, it's unique in the city how every single building has something. the buildings are different as

built over time. it's a great location and tons of transit. there are also some things that are not great. the present is too high. this is not unique to soama. soma. it's unsafe for people to walk and bike for people on transit. there has been industrial zoning in this neighborhood for decades. the plan is to fix all those aspects. the plan has eight goals which try to convey how we keep what is great and fix what is not. one, accommodate jobs and

housing, two, maintain the diversity of residents and have a lively job center. and facilitate walking, biking an transit. offer parks and regulation. have a resilient neighborhood. celebrate the cultural heritage. ensure that new buildings enhance the neighborhood and city. each of the goals is a chapter if the plan. each chapter has all the objectives and policies and implementation measures necessary to fulfill the goal. we have eight chapters and hundreds of policies, basically the plan is boiled down to three, accommodate growth, enhance the neighborhood. i'm going to wuk through each in the presentation. these are zoning and height maps

into one digestible concept. on the left you have existing. on the right, potential. you have large areas in white that are industrial-zoned or rights of way. the areas in yello have 85 feet and the areas in red are 230 feet. on the right, you see we're removing the industrial protective zones and maintain the industrial jobs, just change the zoning and we'll increase the height around the downtown rincon hill and down near the fifth and brannen intersection where there is the biggest development sites there, the old chronicle printing press are all in that intersection. next couple of slides try to help you visualize how the change might occur. this is a renner iting we worked

with about the neighborhood as it -- rendering we worked with about how the neighborhood is today. we have applications in all the way through under construction, we should probably flip this sales force tower now that it's open. areas in yell lo yellow are cenl soma. the developments are clustered in the northern part down near rincon hill. and also on the western part of the plan area. the third is, although the heights are substantial compared to most of the city, they're modest compared to downtown. we try to create a mid-rise district that emphasizes this. another thing that is great about the neighborhood is its openness to the sky. the result as john spoke to is a neighborhood with about

potential for 16 million square feet of development. our proposal right now would have 7,000 units and 45,000 jobs. there will be movement to increase housing to maximize what is potential in the environmental impact report. that will get us to 8300 units and radio deuce the job total to 32,000. -hrch reduce the jo -- reduce tb total to 32 thousands. we'll have a long presentation on the dozens of other things we're doing to create space for housing to accommodate the workers coming here to central soma here and throughout the city. public benefits package, that would yield about $500 million in public benefits. with the change in the zoning, we could over quaw -- more than

quadruple the benefits to $2.2 billion. this is money that comes exclusively from development back to the community, it doesn't count the over billion dollars we go to the general fund and this is over 25 years of the plan build-out. we would get nearly a billion dollars would go towards affordable housing. for that we get over 38% housing affordable including 35% affordable to low and moderate households. we gewe get no net loss to the r jobs in the area. you've a heard enough about the flower mart. you can imagine the flower mart today and in the future where we keep the industrial jobs but enable other kinds of growth to happen. that's what we're proposing with the money. for parks and regulation, we add

quadruple or more the open space in the neighborhood as well as rehabilitate the existing parks that are adjacent. complete streets, we propose # $30 million to fix what is not working in streets, protected bike lanes and protected transit lanes. 7 o million dollars -- $70 million to protect the resiliency of the neighborhood. strategies for stormwater management. 100 percent green house gas free electricity. $40 million for cultural preservation including money for the old men and other historic buildings. $20 million for community services such as job training centers and a to be determined bucket of revenue we identified after we had programmed the rest of the money. i'll talk about that in a

minute. we're working with the planning commission and legislative sponsors to figure out how to spend the money. let's talk about the old mint. we have o $20 million allocated towards the old mint. that's been our proposal for many years. some people say we need less. some people say we need more for the old mint. we think it's the right amount of money to be the first in to anchor the larger strategy. and john lyle is here, he's the project manager for the old mint. i'll defer to john to answer your questions. the next strategy that we're preposing is to extend to central soma, the right for historic buildings to sell their transferable development.

this would be the first time we extend this strategy outside of the downtown core. this would extend to 60 buildings. they'll be part of your subsequent agenda items today. we'll acquire that large office buildings purchase pdr that way we create a marketplace for the build totion sell and maybe there is overage where some of the other buildings downtown could sell to new office developments in central soma. third strategy is to ban the consolidation of narrow lots with buildings with with california status codes 1, 2, 3 and 4, 6l. most don't know what that is. but there are fine-graind parceled streets.

there is a good place to walk town. where they have interesting buildings, our job is to make sure in the future we have that pattern of walk ability. the final and clearly the most exciting strategies is to sport neighborhood's intangible resources. we have the many cultures including the filipino and lgbtq and others doing great work if the neighborhood. state law -- most of our money comes from impact fees and the law requires they be put to physical impact structure. if we change san francisco city law, they can be used on softer costs like social and cultural programming. here are some of the things we want to -- we worked with the

community since we found this out last year figuring out needs and desires and here are a few things we hope to funneled out of our to-be-determined bucket. we want $2 million a year for the soma stabilization fund. it's going to expect to run out in the next couple of years. we can fund it in perpetuity through this plan and that will provide arts programming, tenant services and all the things they've been funding for the program. next thing is $15 million towards capital improvements towards cultural facilities light gardens. there is money banked for capital needs, but there is nothing 10 or 15 years out so we want to put money towards that. if that facility figures out their capital needs, we can put it towards cultural facilities. the plan sets aside $20 million for community facilities. although this can go to job

training centers, it can go towards cultural facilities and housing non-profits. that concludes my presentation for today. we know seven years of work in 15 minutes but i'm excited for your input and comments. >> itches wondering, since we have the three items we're taking action on for recommendation to the planning commission, can you describe the difference between the three different items we're discussing? >> sure, there is m-case which is our amendments to the general plan. that is mostly the central soma plan and a couple of tweaks to other plans that says there is a central soma plan now. i've described the plan and policies. then there is the planning code and mission koi code and amendm.

that's the t-case. then there is the z-case which is zoning map and height map amendments which implement the map map i showed you. then there is another -- there is a u-case which is the implementation plan which is all basically what we're going to do with the money we'll take in. that's not part of the legislation but something that needs to be acted on or at least adopted. so we're interested in your comments as well. >> do we have the u-case today? >> there isn't a legislative piece to that, but we want your input on the package. >> so if we want to comment on the preservation, the financing, or the impact fees that go towards preservation, that would be related to that. >> give us everything. >> all right. thank you. commissioners, do we have any questions before we go to public comment? okay. we'll do public comment.

we will a take public comment on items #-a, b, c and d -- 9-a. b, c and d. >> good afternoon. did you say two or three minutes? >> three minutes. >> i'm catherine, i'm an architectural historian and i'm pleased to address the commission today with regard to two positive aspects of the central soma plan. the landmarking as you heard, of historic districts within the area and more specifically with regard to the public dollars that are intended to aid the old mint future rez traition. arestoration.as you know the ola treasure, an under-utilized anchor for a neighborhood in transition and a place for

public use and enjoyment. in 2002, the city commissioned an historic structure report. whether it was in the process of buying the building for a dollar from the feds, i cowrote the report while i was in the group and i've been following the mint closely ever since. in 2016, the california historical society and the city formed a partnership with a long-term vision for the mint. the partnership continues to make progress in activating and readying a revitalizing a gathering place and sent for history -- center for history and art. key to the partnership and mint restoration is the city's $20 million commitment. that equates to 1% of the overall public benefits package from the central soma plan. on various occasions in the last few months, i have appeared

before the planning commission along with many other advocates and we've argued that the amount for the mint should be higher. several planning commissioners have echoed the sentiment. i would urge this commission to ensure that these $20 million remain allocated for the mint and even to request greater funding through this plan. finally, i want to say that the mint is a kind of monument that will never be built again. it's built for posterity and it's been under-utilized since 1937 when the new mint was built. the phrase public use and enjoyment has real meaning. in the late 1960s, the building was threatened with demolition. in 1972, president nixon transferred the mint from the gsa to the treasury department. we have an opportunity to make

this a reality. i hope we can do it together. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. we'll see if he can get through this. mike bueller on behalf of san francisco heritage. i did want to note, i have a long personal history with -- first of all, i'd like to compliment staff on heir efforts regarding the central soma plan and their approach to historic resources tangible and intangible. i'm here to address the old mint, however. i have a long personal history with the old mint project as a former member of brown task force. we're over 15 years later and the mint is still languishing

although it has the best hope now for the future than it has before through the efforts of the city and california historical society. two years ago, san francisco heritage nominated the old mint for 11 most endangered list to highlight the long-standing neglect of the building and the fact that it's a civic embarrassment for the city of san francisco. and we are strongly supportive of maintaining and increasing the existing allocation of funding under the central soma plan for old mint as mentioned by catherine. the planning commission discussed this item many times as have you. several members of the commission, the planning commission have expressed support for increasing the funding allocation to $30 million or more. that has not been translated into the current plan. but i hope whatever action you

take today, you specify and encourage the planning commission to make it clear in their own resolution on the central soma plan to direct staff to increase funding for the old mint. really, the time has come. the building has been if the current state for 50 years or more. and this is the best hope for its future that we have. i'll also note with respect to the plan's efforts to advance and sustain intangible cultural heritage, i think the mint should be viewed in that frame as well. one of the concepts being considered for the old mint is a cultural commons concept. that would provide space for cultural and arts organizations in the neighborhood. i hope it's more than just a landmark, it's an opportunity to support those inhangable cultural values that find the neighborhood currently.

thank you very much. >> president wolfram: any other speakerspeakers that wish to spn please come forward to the microphone. >> good afternoon, i'm marjorie, i live in the -- on the 4th street corridor. et onli know you're going to the planning commission tomorrow, but there is development going on. i need to make you understand that sometimes we feel that we are the forgotten area. there is a lot of very hisser to, old, old, old houses there. and one them is mine. most of the time when you tell people where you are, the first thing they say is what do you have, one of those condo lofts? maybe you need to walk around central soma and understand the history of the neighborhood with the central subway and now

within that four-block radius, there is like five developments that are going to be major, non-historic high-rises. so reswron, rethis and rethat. there are businesses that have been there for years. we just don't want to be the forgotten area where you wipe out everything and do not realize the history of the area. thank you for taking the time to listen to me. thank you. >> president wolfram: thank you. does any other member of the public wish to comment on the item? seeing and hearing none, we will he close public comment. mr. frye. >> commissioners, to remind you, the resolution we have before you is structured like other review and comment resolutions which is after the whereases you'll see on page four of the resolution, we've created a blank area.

any comments you feel are important to the provide to the planning commission or board of supervisors, we'll add in this comment space here. >> president wolfram: thank you. commissioner pearlman. >> thank you. steve, maybe you could come up. i want to -- i mean -- i haven't been following this for seven years. barely seven days mostly seven hours. i do want to congratulate you on a massive piece of work that is finally coming to some level of fruition. i did get a chance to read most of it in the last few days to get a feel for it. and it is really quite remarkable. i did want to ask about the changes that happened from, i think it was called the central corridor plan to the central soma plan. between, i guess it was 2013 then the end of 2016, there were some changes.