that concludes the hearing. >> the meeting is over. order. good afternoon, welcome to the san francisco historic preservation commission regular hearing for wednesday, october 3rd, 2018.

i would like to remind members of the public to please silence your mobile devices that may sound off during these proceedings. when speaking before the commission, if you care to state your name for the record. i'd like to take roll. [ roll call ] first on your agenda is general public comment. i have no speaker cards. >> does any member of the public we are to speawish to speak. seeing and hearing none, we'll close general comments. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'll do announcements this week. >> item 2 review of past events of the planning staff report and announcements. >> can you see if my mic is going? >> good afternoon, commissioners, tim fry. two quick updates to share with you. as you are aware, the joint arts

commission, our civic design review committee, of the arts commission, and the h.p.c. joint hearing, regarding the civic center plan won'ting occurring on the 15. however, i still have an outstanding meeting with them to get a better understanding of what sort of topics the committee would like to discuss with the commission. i'll meet with the officers and with you in preparing an agenda to have a much more general discussion at a joint hearing at a future date. if there's anything that comes to the top of your mind now, i'm happy to relay that to their staff, when we have that meeting later this week. also, at the last hearing, the commission asked for more information on the number of entitlements and permits associated with h.p.c. activities that mayor breed's legislation. i have connected with kate

conner and carlie grobe from our staff and they will have a report in your packets for your october 17th hearing. that concludes my comments. unless you have any questions. >> thank you. >> any questions for staff? no. >> we can move on to commission matters. item 3, president's report and announcements. >> i have no report on announcement. >> item 4, considering of draft minutes for august 15th, 2018 and the minutes for the regular hearing of september 19th, 2018. i have no speaker cards. >> any comments on the minutes? >> does any member of the public wish to comment on the minutes of september 19th, 2018 or august 15th, 2018. seeing and hearing no public comment. do i have a motion to adopt the minutes. >> i so move. >> second. >> on that motion to adopt the minutes for august 15th and september 19th, commissioner black,. >> yes. >> johns. >> yes. >> matsuda.

>> yes. >> proman. >> yes. >> hyland. >> yes. >> wolfra. >> yes. >> so, the morning paper carried an article about the demise of the elbow room, one of our legacy businesses. for anyone who hasn't been there or hasn't been there recently, caithink the date is early janu. >> go in december or before. >> commissioner hyland. >> i wanted to let you all know that i was invited and director ram joined us, the san francisco moma and the san francisco public library are doing a project.

there's an artist and residents at the headlands center for the arts. they have put their hands on a w.p.a. model of the city. it's 30 feet by 30 feet. eveevery city block down to brisbane. it was on display at city hall from 1939 to 1941. it went into storage. a professor at b.c. berkley was storing it at uc berkley. it's currently at a storage facility for the library. they intend to distribute it across the city in all the branch libraries and have that section of the model displayed for three months. starting on january, february and march. they're looking, they have not located a space yet, but they're

look to go assemble the model for another three months. the goal is to talk about it and toen spire conversations around the development of the city. so stay tuned. we'll keep you posted on that. it's really a phenomenal. >> it was fantastic. one of the things i found extraordinary about it, it's not just the downtown, it's the city. every block. every block is designed to be removable. >> it's an ex extraordinary piece of work. i was blown away by the detail. they painted the buildings the appropriate color. the actual colors they existed at the time. some parts of the downtown, as i understand it, which we didn't fully see, were updated overtime. most of the city is as it was in the w.p.a. era. so 30s i guess. and we are all looking at where

we can put it. it could be on display. it's like 30 by 30 feet as commissioner hyland said. it's a big space to find. our new building doesn't necessarily have a space that big. although we're looking to see if we can do it vertically. that's where it was at one point. because the light cars are used by events and such, i don't think that would work. obviously the space is there. it would be really wonderful to find a place to put this on permanent public display, if we can find it. stay tuned. >> that's great. >> thank you, any other comments? we can move on. seeing none. >> commissioners, your consent calender. the matter listed here is considered to be routine by historic preservation commission and acted by a single roll call vote. there's no separate discussion of this item unless the public

or staff requests which it will be removed from the consent calender and considered at a separate item. item 6, administrative certificate of appropriateness and minor purpose. this is a renewal. >> anyone wants to take this off consent? does any member of the public wish to remove this from the consent calender? seeing none. do i have a motion to approve the consent calender? >> move to approve. >> second. >> thank you. on that motion to approve the renewal delegation, commission black. >> yes. >> johns. >> yes. >> matsuda. >> yes. >> hyland night yes. >> and wolfram. it places under your regular item for calender. 495 gary street. is a major permit to alter. >> good afternoon, commissioners. rebeca, planning staff.

before you is a request for a major permit to alter for exterior alterations for 495 gary street. on the is the east corner of gary and taylor street. the property is within the article 11 market mason conservation district. 495 gary street, known as the cliff hotel was constructed in 1913 and received major addition and renovations in 1926. the proposed scope of work is the construction of a new one-storey rooftop addition on the lower roof of the subject property. in the footprint of an existing non historic temporary tent structure on the roof. the addition will be adjacent to the historic cliff residents rooftop at the subject property. the additional has stucco, plum multi lie window and a pvc roofing. staff finds the proposed work condition is recommended. will be in conformance of

article # 11 and secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation. the proposed rooftop will only be visible from a distance at the south elevation of the building. it will not be visible from the hotel's primary gary and taylor street spots. staff finds although the proposed rooftop addiction will be the cliff residents, the facade has been altered and has non historic window and door openings where the doors and windows used to be. it will have a roof line that parallels the gable roof of the cliff residents. lower than that roof to avoid obscuring from the cliff residents. the rooftop will have stucco. but will have a simple contemporary design top distinguish the edition from the property. the new multi-light aluminum windows will be compatible with

existing historic steel windows found in the upper floors of the hotel. they will be differentiated from the historic windows through their different window opening sizes and configuration. staff's preliminary recommend for this project is for approval with conditions. staff recommending one condition of approval to stipulate late the project sponsor provide the proposed stucco cladding to ensure it's compatible with the finishes of the subject property. no public comments have been received since packets were submitted. this concludes my presentation. unless there are questions and the architect has a brief presentation of the project. >> thank you. would the architect like to come forward? >> will five minutes be adequate? >> i believe so, yeah. >> thank you. >> sfgovtv should pick it up.

>> you see it on the screen? >> yes. >> you can speak in that mic as well. >> good afternoon, i am representing on behalf of the owner of the cliff hotel. we are preparing a renovation of this temporary tent-based. we'll show you a little bit further how this renovation will be in keeping with the existing property. >> i wanted to provide you a few drawings of the hotel. this area of the hotel is built in 1924. it was built for the owner of the hotel at the time.

it was a residents up in the space. it is no longer used as such. it's currently meeting space for the hotel. they hold hospitality-type functions and meetings. it's got an adjacent terrace, that overtime, the property has added temporary to semi permanent tent structures. the property would like to turn those temporary tent structures into a permanent exterior facade. at the same time, we want to make sure that we are improving the life safety of the facility and this floor. you can see, in this small

photograph here, the existing tent structure on the building as well as a 1926 historical photo of that same facade where these three arched windows are currently. it no longer looks like this. and just some other existing windows. and these are some other photos of the interior of this terrace area. you can see there's nothing quite historic about this at this point in time. they've just built on top of the exterior terrace. the tent structure from above. this is a view from taylor street. taylor and ellis, which is about as much as you can see of the existing tent structure. the closer you get to the property, the less you can see of this area because of its

nature of being inside the u of the hotel. our design proposes keeping within existing finishes. we are trying to be compatible with the existing windows. we've worked with rebeca on staff, in terms of the window shapes and sizes. it will be a very simple structure. it's basically just closing the exterior facade. i'm sorry. somehow this got moved and i don't know how to move it back. i don't how to move it become. these are just some details. we are proposing to put our

exterior facade walls along the parapit. this is just an over all plan here that you can see to have some information on where this particular terrace, that is within the property. as you can see, it's really just one large, open space. we're just adding the facade and trying to deal with the exiting requirements of that area. i think that concludes our information. >> great, thank you. >> should i close this down? >> you can leave it. >> just leave it up. >> thank you. >> commissioners, any questions for the project? we'll take public comment on this item. does any member of the public wish to speak. if so, please come forward. >> seeing and hearing none, we'll close public comment.

any discussion? do i have a motion? >> i move to approve with conditions. >> thank you. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to approve this matter with conditions. commissioner black. >> yes. >> john. >> yes. >> pearlman. >> yes. >> hyland. >> and president wolfram. it passed 6-0. item 8. at 1800 mission street this is a certificate of of appropriateness -- >> i need a motion to be recused. >> move to recuse. >> thank you. >> motion to recuse president wolfram. >> so moved that passes unanimously 6-0.

>> good afternoon, again, commissioners. planning staff. before you is a request for a ser tive at of appropriateness to make exterior and interior alterations known as the state arm reand arsenal on mission and 14th street. the property is landmark number 108. the proposed scope of work includes the creation of a new accessible entrance to the building at the south part of the mission street facade. modifications to enter stairs and ramping at the existing main mission street and 14th street entrances. installation of rooftop equipment that will be visible from multiple vantage points, repairs to exterior masonry facade. structural enhancement to the rooftop and interior repairs. staff finds the work condition as recommended. will be in conformance with the requirements for article 10 and the secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation. staff finds that although the creation of the proposed new accessible entrance at the south

enter of the mission street facade will remove the facade cladding. the brick to be removed will be limited to the minimum amount necessary for the creation of the entrance and the removed brick will be salvaged and stored on site. the new entrance will be located on the same facade as the main historic entrance to the building. it will be set within one of the corners to allow the historic entrance to remain unmodified. with a design similar to the exiting entrance doors at the main mission street entrance and simplified in detailing and provide to the historic main entrance. the proposed modifications to stairs and ramping at the existing main entrances at mission street and 14th street, including installing railings at the gran et steps of the main mission street entrance and resloping extending a portion of the existing concrete ramp leading to the main 14th street entrance. we'll enhance the accessibility of these event trances. have minimal attachment points

and we'll be simple in design to avoid detracting from the historic features of the building. staff finds the proposed new rooftop will only be visible from certain view points and are completely hidden from view from most vantage points. as demonstrated by the provided site line studies. the cleaning and repair of the masonry cladding will aid in the preservation of the landmark property. the proposed stabilization of portions of the drill hall roof parapit will not be visible from a public right-of-way. staff's preliminary recommendation for this project is for approval with conditions. staff recommends four conditions of approval regarding review of specifications and mock ups for the proposed cleaning and repair work at the facade. as well as the completion of the parapit repair work approved under h.p.c. motion number 310. with these details all to be reviewed by preservation staff. no public comments have been received since the packets were

submitted. this concludes my presentation unless there are questions. the project team has a brief presentation of the project. >> project team. >> do you think you need more than five minutes? >> five should be fine. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is alex stanford and on behalf of a.j. capital partners, i'm excited to introduce our rehabilitation plans for the iconic san francisco arm room over the past year, our design team has worked to develop accessibility and life safety upgrades, seismic retro that compliment and enhance the buildings architectural features. they will conducted to insure the alterations meet landmark expectations. we take pride in historic restoration projects and one of the cities most culturally

significant neighborhoods. samantha rose will provide more detail on key design elements. thank you. i'll be happy to take any questions later. >> thank you. i'm samantha with t.f. i wanted to review some of our major design goals with our interventions at the mission arm re. these include improving access. bringing the building up to current standards. providing new m.e.p. systems. repairing and extending the life of the building's landmark facade. and increasing seismic resilience as well as repairing existing structural issues. so, from the first floor plan you can see these interventions, hopefully i can get it all on screen. we have a stair at the north. a slight extension to the ramp at 14 street. going into the drill court for accessibility. and then another new stair at

the southeast tourette. you can see our new accessible entry that rebeca mentioned. you will notice the existing historic main entry has a number of steps leading up to the recessed entry doors. this provided -- in order to maintain the charter defining features of this historic entry, we therefore, came up with the idea of a new accessible entry at the southeast portion. so, from the image, you can see the existing southeast and our proposed new entry. we also consulted with the mayor's office on disability, in order to discuss equitable design strategies. so, by having the entry on the southeast tourette, it maintains mission street as the primary entry. it's 200 feet away from the existing historic entry. it's recessed in order to respect the existing facade. and glazed for visual access as well as to enhance the experience when you are inside

the lobby space and beyond. you can see from this perspective that the addition al exterior are quiet. the stair inclose you're is at the north speaking out. as well as the new mechanical units and key recovery units for the m.e.p. systems in the building. and then finally our goals are, again, to help repair and restore the existing landmark facade through masonry repair, window repair, particularly at the existing gun windows in the basement, which you can see at street level. and then, at the drill court facades in the south and west and the 14th street, we were looking at doing repair of large cracks in the existing masonry

as well as the repair work that was discussed under a previous c.o.a. so, thank you very much. i'm here to answer questions as well as alex and coalman of w.j.e. and jim abrams. >> thank you. any questions? >> open this item up for public comment. any member of the public wish to speak on this agenda item? seeing and hearing none. closed public comment. bring it back to the commission. questions? thoughts? motion? >> motion to approve with conditions. >> second. >> this doesn't have conditions. this one is just an approval. >> very good, commissioners on that motion to approve this matter commissioner black. >> yes. >> johns. >> yes. >> matsuda. >> yes. >> pearlman. >> yes. >> and hyland. >> yes. >> so moved. that motion passes unanimously

5-0. item 9 for case number 2018-001477coa at 903 minnesota street. this is a certificate of appropriateness. >> good afternoon, commissioners. natallia with department staff. the item is a why for certificate of appropriateness for 903 minnesota street which is con trib tory to the article 10 landmark district. the properties occupied by a two-storey single-family dwelling designed in the east lake and constructed between 1890 and 1891 as one of pelton's cottages. the proposed project is to correct a violation pertaining to the removal of exterior finishes on the front and wear without the benefit of a permit. it was brought to the department's attention in november of 2016 that the approved scope of work was exceeded. the work is currently under suspension and pending the decision of this commission. the projecten tales the projectg building including wood

cladding, wood -- [ please stand by ]

prepared this short presentation. i am available for any questions and this concludes my presentation. >> thank you. commissioner, do you have a question? >> i have a question. do you want to wait until -- >> i can wait. >> does the sponsor want to come forward and do your presentation? >> yeah, sorry. >> good morning, commissioners. good afternoon. ryan paterson for the project sponsor. we're here because the contractors, i understand, did some removal beyond what was allowed by the permit. without the owner's authorization and we are here to restore the character to defining features of this property and a basic violation. and the architect were recently brought in for this purpose specifically and look forward to working with staff and the commission to achieve that. we'll see a few key photos showing the conditions that the property was in.

i understand that work was related to dry rot that was discovered. so what i understand is that those garage doors were roted to the core and had to be removed but they are going to find doors that are as close as possible to what was removed and we'll work closely with staff on that. happy to answer any questions and the design team is here as well. thank you. >> thank you. there is no additional presentation, right? that was it? ok. let's do public comment. does any member of the public wish to speak? if so, please come forward. >> i do have a question. the letter that came in from the dog patch neighborhood association talked about that those doors are, i assume, they open out as carriage doors. >> that is correct. >> and that they were -- she was implying that thoses are available. they're findable or recreatable. and what i heard you say is that

an overhead typical garage door that looks like it. where is the department on finding replacements for those original doors rather than doing the overhead. because i mean, the dog patch neighborhood association was firmly against that direction. i'm wondering if the departments had talked about that and what they think is ok. >> i believe we've approved a similar story of an operable garage door that looks like a carriage style. so it is consistent with our feedback on other projects. >> is it an entire door or it leaves and they go up -- that's what would make a difference. if it is a sectional door, that looks quite different than the other kind where they go up. >> it is a one-piece door

because the old doors were hinged on the sides. >> yes. yes. >> and they were paired. so i -- >> i believe so. perhaps the project sponsor might have additional information on that. >> right. thank you. does the sponsor know the answer to that question? >> correct. it is a one-piece door that would open. >> rather than sectional? >> yeah. >> great. then i'm for that. >> commissioners, any other discussion? motion? >> i'll make the motion. >> we have a motion from commissioner matsuna. >> very good, commissioners on that motion to approve this matter with conditions. [roll call] that motion passes unanimously 6-0. and places us on items 10-a

through f for case numbers 2018-006629mls. 2018-006796mls. 2018-006629mls. and 2018-oo77338mls for properties at 2253 webster, 353 kearney street. 456 through 467 oak street, 587 waller street, 354 through 356 san carlo street and 811 tree avenue, respectively. these are all mills act applications. we should hear from staff first, sir. >> are you ok? >> yes. >> because we have identified -- >> sir.

sir. we're going to hear from staff first and then receive public comment and at that time you can testify. >> you will be invited back. don't worry. >> good afternoon, commissioners. shannon ferguson, planning department staff. the items before you today are six historical property contracts. the legislation authorizes local governments to enter into contracts with private property owners of qualified historic properties. this agreement provides property tax reductions to owners of those historic properties who can then allocate the savings towards an appropriate maintenance and restoration plan. the departments currently holds 31 active contracts. the department receives six novak application by the may 1 filing deadline. department staff reviewed each

application for a completeness, conducted preapproval sections and worked with applicants to revise their rehabilitation and maintenance plans as necessary. all six property owners will enter into a contract with the city. the agreements are 10-year revolving contracts that are renewed annually. your commission packets contain a draft valuation for each property, outlining the potential property tax savings. these figures were compiled by the assessor's recorders office. each property owner has outlined with the assistance of department staff rehabilitation and maintenance plans that will ensure that work will be conducted in conformance of the secretary of the interior standards. our first supreme court 2253 webster street. it's a two-storey plus basement wood frame single family dwelling designed in the italian age style. it was constructed circa 1900 and it is a contributor to the

webster street historic district. the applicant has already completed some rehabilitation to the building. in 2017 including dry rot repair and painting at an estimated cost of $75,000. the proposed rehabilitation plan includes can flashing replacement, roof replacement, additional dry rot repair and are placing the front door and kind. the rehabilitation work is estimated to cost over $87,000. for over 10 years. thes proposed maintenance plan includes any wood section of the siding, front porch and door. maintenance work is estimated to cost $3500 annually. any needed repairs will be made in kind and will avoid altering or removing character features. the property owner will receive an estimated property tax savesing of $13,000, $13,750. it is a reduction of 54.73%

from the based year value. the next property is 353 kearney street. a five-story over mason ri commercial brick building designed in the renaissance revival style. a category four contributing building to the kearney conservation district. the building is currently valued by the assessor's office at over $3 million. so a historic structure report was submitted to demonstrate that granting the exemption would result in the [inaudible] of the property. it includes brick repair and repointing at the facade and basement. repair and in kind replacement of wood windows, plaster repair, sheet metal corners repair, sheet elevator and stair repair and store front repair and replacement.

rehabilitation work is estimated to cost over $1 million over 10 years. but the maintenance plan includes annual in? dian sp*ex of the roof, elevator wood basement, window, store fronts, sheet metal corners and fire escape with any in kind repair of deteriorated elements as necessary. maintenance work is estimated to cost $23,000 annually. and it is intended to meet the secretary's standards. the property own her receive a tax savings of $26963. that's a 32.82% from their factor based year value. property is 465-467 oak street two-story plus wood frame building and built circa 1900. it's a contributor to the hayes

valley residential california registered historic district. the applicant complete rehabilitation work to the building in 2017 including wood window repair including exterior repair at a cost of over $6,000. thes proposed rehabilitation plan includes seismic upgrade, roof replacement, exterior painting and is estimated to cost $369600 over 10 years. the proposed plan includes section of the roof, downspouts and porch and wood siding. repairs will be made in kind and are intented to meet the secondtyers's standards and will cost approximately $2,000 annually. the property owner will receive an estimated property tax savings of $16250, which is a 52.98% reduction from their

factored based year value. the next one is a contributing building to the devos park historic district. the proposed rehabilitation plan includes seismic and foundation work, roof replacement, front facade restoration, window replacement and front steps and porch restoration. rehabilitation work is estimated to cost over $337,000 over 10 years. the proposed maintenance plan includes annual inspection of gutters and downspouts, windows, front steps and front porch, front facade and roof and any needed repairs will be made in kind and will be -- will meet the secretary's standards . the property will receive an estimated tax savings of $16412. it's a 58.3% reduction from

their factored base year value. the next building is 354-356 san carlos street. it's a three-story wood-framed, two-family residential building, originally designed in the italian style and built in 1977. -- 1877. the front facade was altered with stucco cladding. and the front steps were stuccoed. and vinyl windows were added at an unknown date. the applicant complete substantial rehabilitation work to the not 2016, including front facade restoration, window replacement, exterior painting, front stair replacement and foundation and structural work. the proposed rehabilitation plan includes free placement and is estimated to cost $50,000. the proposed maintenance plan includes annual inspection of the roof, gutters, drains,

window, foundation and the structure. annual inspection of the siding and trim will occur as well. any needed repairs will be made in kind and will meet the secretary's standards. maintenance work is estimated to cost $1600 annually. the estimated property tax savings is $4552. this is a 25.05% reduction from the factored based year value. as you know, the -- during the 2017 mills act application cycle, the g.a.o. committee has concerns regarding propertis that had already completed rehabilitation work. however, staff believes that the rehabilitation work has had a positive impact on the building and historic district. 811 tree is known as the henry gillfis house analysted on the register for historic places t. property comprises an italian main residence designed by a local master architect henry

gillfi circa 1882 as a personal residence. just the raised room and main residence are contributing features. the work shom and garage are nine contributing features. the proposed rehabilitation plan includes siding and trim repair and repainting, combatable garage door replacement, door repair and decorative glass replacement and roof replacement. the rehabilitation work is estimated to cost $60,000 over 10 years t. proposed maintenance plan includes annual inspection of the foundation, roof, gutters, windows and front porch. and inspection of the siding and trim will occur every five years. any needed repairs will be made in kind and intended to conform with the secretary standards. maintenance work is estimated to cost $2100 annually. the estimated property tax is $368, a 2.20% reduction from the factored base year value.

department staff recommends the historic preservation commission recommend approval to the board of supervisories for the following reasons. the propertis are all qualified historic resources. their rehabilitation and maintenance plans were found to be appropriate and all proposed work is intended to meet the secretary of interior standards. this concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions. several of the property owners are here today. to answer any questions or speak. >> before we go to public comment, i have a question for staff related to this set of applications and the june item that is coming up about the proposed amendments to the mill's act. would you be able to, in brief, sort of classify how if we were to use these amendments t criteria that in here, how you would rank these projects that we've been asked to approve now. >> mm-hmm. um -- ahem. let's see.

let's see. i would say that the ranking -- 353 kearney appears to have the most changes, the most rehabilitation work and seems to meet all the criteria consideration if those would be used for this year. and they have a very great investment that they're going to be incurring over 10 years. others that have a good plan are 587 waller street. again, with restoring the facade. it said necessity in investment.

and it would probably be followed by webster, treat and san carlo street. >> all right. thank you. so why don't we take public comment at this time. does any member of the public wish to speak? please come forward. you'll have three minutes and a warning buzzer. 30 seconds before your time is up. go ahead. >> how are you doing? [inaudible]. >> can you speak more into the microphone? >> mr. gregor williams. [inaudible] investor. and the proposal that she just indicated is a costly repairment and renovating. and it costs us too much where it's -- we know we want to save that property. if it's historic. especially in the 1800s. and it's important that we do renovate it. but she didn't bring any graphics or photos to show the

repairment that needs to be done inside the property. now the important thing is we don't want to costly spend the financial means that is important where we can utilize it for the [inaudible]. it's highly important on thats proposal. there was an investigation on that and people went to jail. so we want the importance to understand that the futile spending is so much money -- it isn't going to cost that much to remodel and renovate them and look them over. it really isn't going to cost millions of dollars that's for sure. so what we need to do is get inspectors in there to identify the projects. if we intend to agree that we are going to fund it to have it renovated. the indication is your --

you're throwing people out of property or apartment complexes. theres has to be a reason to do so if it is intended to a -- landlord [inaudible] away from me, has some type of landlord-tenant disagreements. if you tell people they cannot live in their homes for by x reasons, then it doesn't serve the purpose to allow them to have equal opportunity of the 14th amendment. equal protection of the law. and we must make sure that the law is provided when we do our decisions. and the 14th amendment will cost a civil litigation because if you take people and say you ear not paying enough taxes, or your rent increases, then we must afford it for them. so we must decrease the cost of

taxing, because it's excessive and it's increasing so much that we can't live anymore. it's unaffordable. the important thing is we want to make sure that people are not homeless, that they are in their homes, even if they have children. we don't want to throw them on the street to make a bigger homeless environment and we're going to make sure that the homeless has the opportunity to acquire housing and vocational training. >> thank you very much. your time is up. >> i'm going to veto thats proposal. >> excuse me, sir. your time is up. thank you very much. >> i am president. and what i'm intending to do is, as i always said, we're going reform the government. we'll come in here and promote [inaudible]. ok? >> thank you. your next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm jim warshall. president of the san francisco victorian alliance and i'm excited to see so many wonderful mills acts coming

before you and soon the board of supervisors. we all know what a passion it is to take and restore one of these homes and thens to go into a maintenance agreement and perform that ritual of good upkeep. so, it appears all of these are quite outstanding houses. i'm most familiar with the oak street one and it is a truly charming wonderful house that i visited and while that's the one i can speak to with the most knowledge. all of the candidates that were presented to you, if they met the current criterion, i would be very excited by your doing that. as an aside, the first mills act that you approved, the nightingale house, will be appearing in the october 21 victorian alliance house steward. and it is sunday afternoon. obviously would love to see all of you there. we will have for city landmarks of the nine houses we feature. but to the business at hand

today, recommend approval for all and especially the oak street house. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is joe laska. i'm here on behalf of my wife jennifer who, unfortunately, is traveling on business this week. together we own the russell warren house at 465-460 street that jim just mentioned. and it is about 150 years old. it's an italianate flatfront victorian and on the national register of historic places. if you come by and take a look at it, and i hope you all will, i invite you to do that, you'll see that the facade is already quite beautifulment for better or worse. all the fun work has been done for the most part. and we spent a lot of time renovating the inside of the house. the work that is left to be

done is the work that is not very sexy, but is essential. the foundation is also 150 years old and needs to be shored up. the house needs a new roof. a new rear balcony. together that work i think is estimated to cost $370,000 or so. it's very expensive. and so the estimated tax savingses proposed over so years, we think will cover maybe roughly about half of the cost of doing this work. so i really wanted to come here today just to introduce myself, to thank you for considering the application and to assure all of you that if this is approved that the money is going directly back into the house. there's no windfall for anyone here. so, thank you. >> thank you. >> any other speakers who wish to speak on these agenda items? seeing and hearing none, we'll close public comment. commissioners? >> i move that they be approved. >> thank you. >> do we have a -- >> second.

>> any discussion? no. ok. >> very good, then, commissioners. there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt recommendations for approval. on that -- [roll call] so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 6-0. and places upon us item 11 for case for the mills act program. this is for your review and comment. >> good afternoon, commissioners. sharon ferguson, planning department staff. the item before you today is a review and discussion of modifications to the mills act application packet. a little bit of background. the mills act was enacted in 1972 and the legislation allows owners of qualified historic

properties who actively participate in rehabilitation to receive property tax relief. owners enter a 10-year rolling contract with the city and the contract serving renewed each year and transferred to subsequent owners. property owners agree to rehabilitate their property in accordance with the secretary standards, the state historic building code and conditions identified in the contract. ahem. san francisco adopted the mills act program in 1996. in 2012, the process was made more predictable and affordable for applicants. the city holds 31 mills act contracts and the largest number of mills act contracts are located in dubose historic park district. all of our mills act contracts range from sing family homes, apartment buildings to commercial and retail buildings. during 2017 mills act application cycle, the government audit oversight committee had several comments

and concerns regarding the mills act program, just to recap the government audit and oversight committee felt that more property owners should be able to take advantage of the mills act and that several properties applying for mills act have a violation. also several properties had already completed rehabilitation work without the benefit of the mills act and the work appears as if it would have been completed regardless of whether a mills act contract was entered into. scope of work should be reviewed and approved by planning before the mills act contract is forwarded to the board of supervise source and finally mills act contracts should be executed when there is a preservation need and terminated when there is no longer a preservation need. it may not be necessary for contracts to remain rolling contracts. so term limits can be considered. reflecting these concerns, the g.a.o. approved three 10-year rolling contracts and approved three contracts limited to a

10-year term. the h.p.c. recently approved resolutions to limit these contracts to the 10-year term. two contracts were not approved. in response to g.a.o. concerns and that the h.p.c. requests, staff developed several modifications to the mills act program that may allow for better alignment with the g.a.o.'s intents. they discussed these proposed modification at hearing in may. the draft mills act application found in your packets has been revised to reflect those discussions and modifications and i'll go through each modification now. so currently all qualified historic properties are those that are designated at the local, state or national level are elg tonight apply for the mills act contract. with thes proposed amendment, qualified historic properties must meet priority

consideration criteria in order to be considered for the mills act contract. application would be reviewed on the merits of the priority consideration criteria to ensure that applications forwarded to the assessor h.b.c. and board of supervisors are high-quality applications that meet or exceed the requirements of the mills act program and address and prioritize individual preservation needs. so, the first criteria would be necessity. the promises would require financial incentive to help ensure the preservation of the property. this criterion will establish that the supreme court in danger of deterioration and in need of substantial rehabilitation and restoration and have significant associated costs. propertis with previous violations for deferred maintenance would not meet this criteria. the second criterion would be investment. the projects will result in additional investment in the property other than routine maintenance. this may include can seismic retrofiting.

this criterion will establish that the owner is commited to investing in the mainls nance of the property. the next criterion would be distinctiveness. the project will preserve a distinctive of a property. due to its exceptional nature. [coughing] the fourth cry tier dwron would be that the promise would preserve a property where a legacy business is located. this criterion will establish that the owner is commited to preserving the property, including physical features with a finite existing legacy business. and the last criterion would be recently designated city landmarks. currently eligibility is limited to properties on or before december 31. with the proposed amendment -- [coughing] excuse me. >> take your time. have a water break.

>> with the proposed amendment, existing designation requirements would remain the same. however, the designation timeframe would change. this would expand eligibility to more property owners and give property owners more of an tounlts seek historic designation. [coughing] the last priority consideration criteria would require amendment to the administrative code. all other criteria could be made at the staff level. [coughing] properties with outstanding violations issued by the department of building inspection or outstanding enforcement violations as viewed by the planning department would not be eligible for the mills act contract. [coughing] all violations must be corrected before an application is accepted or processed. thises proposed policy -- [coughing]

addresses concerns raised by the g.a.o. committee and this change can be made at the staff level. since the goal of the mills act spram to provide an incentive for rehabilitation -- [coughing] requiring minimum scopes of work such as seismic work, accessibility will see improvements when it ensures that all properties hold a contract of rehabilitation. others go to work beyond the minimum and fi for discussion of the h.b.c. or board of supervisors and this policy change can be made at the staff level. the current mills act application allows property owners to include scopes of work that have been completed in the last year. requiring that scopes of work not be completed before the contract is in effect demonstrates the need for a tax benefit.