>> good afternoon and welcome to the hearing for wednesday, february 20, 2019. i would like members to please silence your cell phones and please state your name for the record. i would like to take roll at this time. (roll call). acknowledging your last hearing with us. commissioners, first on your agenda is general public comment. at this time members of the public may address interests to the public except agenda items, your opportunity to address that

will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member may address up to three minutes and i have no speaker card. >> any member wish to address the commission. please step forward. >> hello. my name is t ash laker smith and this is regarding a property on treasure island. i don't know if you guys -- if you people have jurisdiction over treasure island. it has served as the naval payroll, administrative offices during world war ii. it was an infirmary, as well as payroll. and it was a depository. so now, it has been turned into

a dress factory, a machine shop, a moto guild of sorts, which is a meeting of people that ride motorcycles, so they learn vix and it's helped a lot of people get up on motorcycles. this is what we're doing as well as a place for indigo films to keep their set props, which they're a subsidiary of discovery channel. i don't know if you've ever heard of indigo films but they've been on treasure island a long time. not as long as world war ii but excite some time now. so my dad said that coming here and trying to preserve this building is like the hail mary pass but i think with the team that we have and the players that we have, that it's

possible, because this has been a very historic building. and it's a beautiful one. >> thank you. >> seeing no further public comment, we can move on to department matters, item one, director's announcements. >> good afternoon, commissioners. nothing to report under director's announcements other than please visit the new website. >> i did. >> if you have not noticed, it's been revamped including a new preservation section, still working out some of the bugs but please let us know your thoughts on usability and function and that concludes my report. >> thank you. >> item two, review of the planning commission staff report an announcements. >> just a few things to share with you. one is at last week's planning

commission hearing, there was an appeal heard of the document related to the hearse building. as you probably read it's being proposed to be converted to a hotel and there's a four-story vertical toward the rear. the project sponsor is seeking federal rehabilitation tax credits for the project and the project also requires the major permit to alter to be issued by this body. the appellant raised concerns over conformance with the secretary of standards. however, after a short back and forth and the fact that the shipo is in general concurrence and it's the department's reading that it' it will here

shortly, it is a project that conforms with the standarded is not found to have an impact on historic resources for the purposes of seqa. so the appeal was denied and the project now continues on its panel for entitlement and you will see that project shortly and it will make its way back to the commission, the planning commission. two other items to report. one is your landmark recommendation to designate the interior of our lady of guadalupe was transferred to the court and proposed designation for a sunshine school and roosevelt middle school are scheduled for the full board next week on the 26th of february and i'll report back once those i'ms are heard. that concludes my items.

>> any questions? >> should we be attending that board meeting about roosevelt and sunshine school? >> it's a great question. the land use committee hearing has been heard so i don't believe there will be public comment. however, you are welcome to attend with us. we will be sitting in the audience in case some questions come up, but we believe those questions will be directed directly from the board president. >> ok. >> i had a question on the hearse building, seeing it meets the standards and it's coming before us for cna because it's in article 10 or 11 or both. that's correct, right? >> yes. >> if it wasn't before article 10 or 11, the only reason it would come before us because it didn't meet the standards and that would require an eir? >> correct.

>> is this project requiring an eir? >> i believe the seqa document was a mitigated declaration which has a fairly low bar and they're appealed to the planning commission and the planning commission felt that the neg-deck was sufficient. >> so this would be -- if this project were not in an article 10 or 11, this would be an exact time of project that i would be curious on how many in the city have fallen into this category. >> very good, commissioners, we can move on to item 3, president's report an announcements. >> i do have an announcement. >> president wolform, after ten years of being here, we wanted to extend our sincere appreciation and we've gotten

you a certificate from the historic preservation from 2009 to 201 and your commitment to preserving the historically and culturculturally heritage of san francisco. san francisco. we thank you for your time and you'll be missed. we wish you well. (applause). >> thank you. >> item four, consideration of draft minutes for the arc hearing of january 16, 2019, the regular hearing of january 16, 2019, the joint hearing with the san francisco planning commission on january 24, 2019 and regular hearing of february 26, 2019. i havjanuary 26. i have to speaker cards. >> any member of the public wish to comment on the minutes?

>> i wanted to mention the property i was talking about is 848 13th street, 94130. >> we're taking public comment on the minutes right now. thank you. >> closed public comment to the commission. i. >> i move to adopt the minutes. >> second. >> commissioner black? >> yes. >> commissioner john's? so moved commissioners and that motion passes unanimously 6-0. i'm 5, commissions, comments and questions? >> any comments or questions, commissioners?

seeing non, iteming for continuous 93co, certificate of appropriateness is proposed to march 6, 2019. >> commissioners, want to take this up to continuance. continuance? >> i move we continue it until march 6. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to continue item 6 to march 6. commissioner black? so moved, commissioners and that passes 6-0, placing us under your calendar for 7a- 7a-e100129 lbr 13r, 23-135,

2019, 136 lbr and case number 201-9127 lbc at 2639 18t 2639 18th street. 2210, fillmore street, and 1950 innis avenue three respectively. >> commissioners, shal i have fe applications for you today and i'll give very brief descriptions of each and then if any of the business owners are here, they can further describe their businesses during public comment. biright markets at 3639 18t 3639 18th street, the primary crass and they have an additional location at 550 arrow street. this is a full service grocery store founded in 1940 at the 18th street location in the mission district and since 1964,

the business has been in the same family. it has been in the -- sorry, i'll start practicing last names before i come to the hearings. magonum family since 1964 when brothers jack and ned bought the business and building and the market is now owned by sam magonam. excuse me. he's the second generation to operate the market. the store was a pioneer in the farm to grocery store movement under sam's direction for the past 20 years, it has become a family of businesses creating hundreds of jobs, providing small food producers, and opportunity to grow their businesses and being committed to a mission of creating community through food by teaching, feeding and giving back to community. the property at 18th street was found to be individually

significant under california register criteria 3 for the design. this was identified during the intermission north historic resource survey and staff is recommending approval of the application with both locations. we're recommending the following features to be preserved. the 18th street and storyfronts, including tile bulkheads, the interior light features at 18th street, the neon sign at 18th street, their farm-to-table produce and direct sourcing, celebration of craft and heritage, a passionate and well-trained staff and mission to create community through food. that brings us to the second application. that's for mediterranean at

2210 fillmore street and they have additional locations at 288noay street and powell street and all are included in the application. levon opened the restaurant in 1979 at the 2210 fillmoore street location. his middleeastern cuisine was inspired by his lebanese family recipe. the family-run business remains headquartered location. their food is made from scratch daily using the freshest ingredients. fresh produce is of the utmost importance to the restaurant. they have identified 2210 fillmoore street to the cluster of historically significant

storefronts, circa 1890 building is noted and 26 powell street as eligible for the california register. staff is supporting the application along with the three locations in san francisco and recommending the following features to be preserved. the art deco front door and stained glass window at 2210 fillmoore street, middle eastern cuisine and scratch cooking, the employee benefits including bonuses, full health covering, 401k and time-off schedules. the affordable prices, the copper panels made by artists carlos pisanta, the two bamboo mermaids by local artists and sandblasted wood sign. takes us to the next

application. let's do wash coin and was founded by german immigrant couple in 1996 and in 2007, the current owners took over the business. they transformed the laundromat into an art gallery and also recollecting a dirth art space, they opened up a residency program for artists. it space is 500 square feet and it serves as co-exhibit space the owners have organized. it also features a community garden and large screen movie wall to facilitate community events. the department has identified the building as an individual historic resource for its storefront at the neighborhood

commerciacommercial survey. the art studio and exhibit space, the movie screen and projector, the vintage laundry, the communal space, art displace cases and their sign. that takes us to the fourth applicant. the make-out room located at 3225, 22nd street. the make-out room was founded in 1996. the establishment is a 21 and over club featuring live music, d js and special events, a classics dance hall continuing the tradition of latin music started by the former owner and they hold monthly latino music, serving their local community.

the department is recommending -- i'm sorry, the department has identified the building as an individual historic resource for the storefront design and the resource survey and we are supporting their application with the following features. their role as a neighborhood live music special event venue, their commitment to environmentally conscious business practices, latin music tradition, the interior decoration, including restored wanscotting, pillars woodwork and control be beams, marquis with wind powered pallets, two-tiered stage and neoclassical back bar circa 1910. and that brings us to our last applicant. the monsingh noodle company. it was established in 1932, they

make fresh noodles, specializing in egg noodles, including asian noodles, wonton wrap, eggroll wraps and they prepare middle eastern pasta and italian pasta. it caters to wholesalers and culinary institutions throughout the greater bay area. the current owners, the kongh family have a long history with the business and craft of noodle making. when they purchased the building it was specializing in egg noodles and the new owners introduced new products that were made famous in hong kong and distinctive to mainland china. the department is recommending approval of the application and we're recommending the following features to be preserved. their selection of asian middle eastern and italian noodles,

wrap and pastas, their machineries including mixers, rollers and cutters and their matter noodle makers and that concludes my presentation. i'm available for questions. >> great, thank you. >> do we want to go to public comment? >> would any member of the public wish to comment on this, on any of these items? please step up. you have three minutes and 30 seconds before you'll hear a buzz. >> hi. commissioner, thank you for giving me a chance to introduce myself. my name is connie kong. my husband and me own the business. since 1959. >> can you use the microphone? [ laughter ] >> thank you. >> to own the small business in san francisco is not easy. we work hard everyday.

we enjoy to make our noodle to serve to the people. we work early morning and get home late but we enjoy. we have my family, my son and my daughter, they grow up. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> my name is ginger kong and my mom did the introduction. so i'm a fourth generation artist noodle maker, so it has been a family business of ours. you probably don't know hour namour namebut chances are you'r noodle if you dined in sanfrancisco. we're one of the older noodle factories in sanfrancisco. we've been in business since 1932. we're a little known secret among season chefs through word of mount. we don't do any advertisement.

our home-style noodle is one of san francisco's original and dates back to the origin of our noodle shop. our humble beginning beginning d in the 1930s. i remember that my dad, being a hard worker, he would make the first batch early in the morning at 4:00 a.m. and tha then by 7:00 a.m., we had a line of customers wanting to purchase the noodle because we made fresh. now my brother and i are fourth generation noodle makers continuing this craft pu. i think because our noodle represents family and it reminds our customers of traditional family meals and gatherings. family share stories and recipes

while making wontons using our wraps. every year we have customers come back to our shop to order their favorite noodles and maps, wraps, no matter where they travel. they always come back to our shop. this is a wonderful time for us because we get to catch up for them. our family keeps, grow, as you can imagine and so has our product line because we've been getting a lot of different things if customers, not only asian, but middle-eastern and italian wraps and others, too. thank you again for acknowledgement into the legacy business program and means a lot to my family and noodle makers before us. we want to continue our passion and reintroduce old style noodles to generations to come and this is a wonderful way to kick off national noodle month

which is march. [ laughter ] >> thank you so much. >> thank you. >> any other members of the public, please step up. i'm amy morris and i'm the general manager of the make-out room. thank you, i've been the general manager for ten years and i was a customer back in the early '90s when it started. it's a great bar and entertainment venue and we support a lot of local artists, musicians, a lot of writing events, literal events, book launchings and we work closely with all of the neighborhood businesses. they have their parties there and bring their clients to our bar and we just really could use the help with the legacy

program. we are month to month -- operating on a month to month basis because we can't get a lease from our landlord, even though we've been there 23 years. we do have a new neighbor, the tinker kitchen and we know it's a viable option to continue on. we've approached them, but could use some help with that negotiation. i was the president of the mission merchant's association so i worked a lot with the businesses in the area and part of the mission has a few gaping holes with fires and we're waiting for businesses to be developed. so we're forging ahead everyday to be a live venue for the patrons in the area and our changing neighborhood and we would like to stay there for 23 more years. thank you. >> thank you. >> anyone else from the public? seeing none bee, hearing none, l close public comment and bring

it back to the commission. mr. wolfram. >> once again, this is a great group of legacy businesses. it's impressive to see such diversity and i want to thank the members who came up and business owners who came to speak because it's meaningful to hear your stories and to hear about the history of your businesses and how important they are to the neighborhood. so it's a great group and i would forward a motion to recommend approval of this? >> thank you. >> i second the motion. >> commissioner perlman. >> thank you all for participating in the program. for me, it's my favorite part of what we do, because we get to hear your stories and they're so meaningful. obviously, i probably have eaten your noodles, but we wouldn't know who you are, otherwise. so this is a way that we can get to know you and you can introduce yourself to sanfrancisco, even though you've been around much longer than most of us. i'm sorry from let to do wash

isn't here. it's a part of town i'm not in frequently but i love the notion of the art gallery. like you're doing your wash and there's an art gallery and studio and that's the spirit of the neighborhood and the spirit of participating in the community and same with the make-out room, having those kind of literary events. >> thank you. >> it's right next door to marla's bakery. >> ok, that helps. >> i want to echo my fellow commissioner's comments. one of the things that strikes me every time is how hard people have worked for ten, 20, 30, even longer to make their businesses really part of san francisco and it's part of what makes the city special. i also love how some of the businesses are multigenerational. that's absolutely wonderful. it's what retains people in

found. you have a connection to the community that's much broader than if you hadn't been here for very long. i only wish that the noodles were retail for the public. >> we are. [ laughter ] >> very good, thank you very much. further. >> there's a motion to adopt recommendations of approval for all of the legacy business applications and that motion, commissioner black. >> yes. >> commissioner john's. >> yes. >> commissioner pellman? >> yes. and commission president hiland. that motions passes unanimously 6-0. congratulations. >> thank you. this will place us on item 8 for 130156 srv for the city-bide cultural resources presentation.

>> good afternoon, i'm here to present an overview of the cultural resource's survey including background and goals of the survey, history of veer and data collection or our legacy data we have to date and survey methodology, outreach proposal, the data collection and management platform and proposed survey phasing and staffing. as i go through the presentation, i will occasionally stop for questions but please feel free to ask or make comments throughout and i know that i have a tendency to speak a little fast so i'll rely on commission johns to slow me down. >> i will do my best. [ laughter ] >> before i begin, i want to introduce our two veer interns

who are if the consequence. elizabeth munyion and melanie bishop back here. this is only melanie's third week with us, but she's been very helpful putting this presentation together and we look forward to all of our critical conditioncriticalhercoh was here over the summer and worked on the pilot survey and has been helpful with the overall pilot and for this particular presentation, she has been present for many of the maps you will see. just quickly, what is a survey? a process of identifying and gathering data on a community's historic resources and maintaining an inventory of that data. generally, the primary components of a survey are property documentation, evaluation, an inventory or database of that survey, a

documentation, and outreach. so why do we do that survey process? surveys are an integral part of any preservation program providing critical tools for understanding, identifying and protecting those resources that give each community its individual character and sense of place. among other things surveys provide information needed to make informed planning decisions, develop policies, perform reviews pursuant to seqa, which is related to california and not other jurisdiction and assist in the identification of resources that are worthy of designation. maintaining the system for surveying and inventory of historic services is also a requirement of the certified local government program which the city has been part of since 1995. although there have been many surveys conducted in san francisco in the past, none have approached survey at a city-wide

scale. previous surveys have been project-based or community sponsored, focusing on a single neighborhood or property type. in their 2013 joint report on historic preservation, they stressed the need for a city-wide survey and there has been growing support throughout the survey. the survey is intended to be a multiyear effort to identify, evaluate and document properties and places that reflect importance themes in architectural and cultural history. it will address, disaster planning and recovery, the low economy and supporting new housing and development. as i mentioned, surveys have been done if san francisco since 1967. they have been prepared by volunteers, historical societies or neighborhood group, consultants and planning staff

and generally funded by certified local government grants, historic preservation fund grants, community sponsorship or area planned budgets. survey documentation has also taken different forms over the years to reflect best practices in the preservation field as well as the survey process. in general, the documentation includes a photograph of the building or site or object being surveyed, a description, a historic context or theme related to the object being surveyed, and an evaluation. typically, this documentation has resulted in a survey form. although, that has recently evolved to a survey record or entry in a spreadsheet database. and this slide shows the evolution of those previous surveys with 1976 survey form on the top left, where you see an

individual surveyor has filled out with the clipboard and pencil their results and attached a physical photo and then we kind of -- there's veer versions of there and the gpr form which was developed by the state preservation office and then more recently to a spreadsheet with the photo. given the number of previous investigatorsurveys and forms tt constitute or leg siacy data, we have spent time reviewing to determine how many properties have been surveyed previously and where these properties are located, to identify context and themes that have been documented and have identified properties associated with them. to determine the age of our building stock and how that building stock is dispersed across the city and to understand and glean best practices from these previous

preservation studies. so in undertaking this sort of analysis, what we've come to determine is that we have roughly 155 and 175 individual parcels in the city and the reason there's that discrepancy is it has to do with how we filter that data in terms of removing condos which give you multiple parcels within the same physical property and then also there may be multiple buildings upon a single parcel. and then we've also determined how many parcels have already been surveyed, as well as how many contained buildings that were built after 1974 or that are vacant and when you take those groups out, we're left

with roughly 80 to 100,000 properties that we think that we would need to survey. and i should mention here that i'm going to keep saying property and parcel, which is really the bulk of what we will be focusing on for the survey, but i'll note later that we will be going outside of property boundaries and looking at other objects, features within the general landscape but for ease of this conversation, i'm going to say properties or parcels. and i'll return to these numbers again in a future slide when discussing the schedule and estimated duration of the everall survey. so to this map, as we were assessing our past documentation, we realized that we never looked at this information spacially, which is important when considering how to undertake a city-wide effort so we together a map and some following maps to identify areas

of the city where we have adopted surveys and that's the green and red shaded areas. and those are just shaded differently to show what was adopted under the landmark's board versus the commission. and within these shaded areas, the majority of parcels have been evaluated. the areas outlined in black note most of the commercial districts where we also have completed a draft survey based on historic context statement and evaluative framework for mixed use commercial buildings. what this map does not include is areas identified as eligible districts or potentially eligible districts and hrers or historic resource evaluations as part of a seqa evaluation because generally within those potentially eligible districts, that to not look at every parcel

within that potential district. so this map depicts where we have historic context statements with the geographic focus and you'll note that many of the areas we have atonighted surveys are shown on this map because they generally have associated context statements. what's not reflected are context statements with a social cultural or architecture building type focus as these tend to be applied to the whole city and it doesn't effectively render on a map to that layer but contexts like the lgbtq or modern architecture would be an example. we have a number of these types of contexts in progress, including african-american and latino, chinese, american and new deal era. so these maps are helping us assess where additional

documentation is necessary, as well as where there may be information embedded in existing context statements and surveys that would be applicable to a city-wide context statement. consistent with survey best practices, the city-wide survey is intended to be context based but given the experience that we've learned of with survey a, which spent many years and significant funds developing a city-wide context before they even started survey, we believe that we need to do more with our already substantial documentation, to use that information more efficiently, identify those information gaps, particularly gaps related to cultural heritage context and develop a city-wide context that essentially alongside the survey process. and then we also have a map here of designated resources, so

national california or locally designated districts, as well as individual property, just to give you a sense of where those are located. so i'm going to pause before i move to the next sort of section and see if there are questions or comments. and also to take a little drink of water. [ laughter ] >> i have a quick question. >> mr. perlman. >> thank you. >> are we going to see a map or all of those are overlaid on each other? it looks like a significant part of the city. obviously if there are 80 or 100,000 that haven't been surveyed, that's not a significant part of the city. but it looks like there's a lot that is already mapped. so just curious if we'll see that. i haven't looked ahead. >> if i can go back to the presentation, back on the screen. the one thing to note about this particular map of the context

statements is that within these areas, we might have -- the context will contain historic information about the development of that area and some of them, the more recent ones also contain an evaluative framework to properties within that geography that would be identified but these don't contain, with the exception of the areas surveyed, they don't contain actual property by property evaluation. and unfortunately, no, we don't currently -- in this presentation, we don't have a map with those things overlaid. but generally speaking, the adopted surveys are located -- >> back one. >> -- towards downtown and eastern neighborhoods and the other areas of light blue are where we have the context statements.

the pace of the presentation is excellent. >> thank you. >> i did have one question as for clarification. you mentioned you'll get to some of the numbers later, on 80 to 100,000 properties, you're talking total, right? or is that yet to be surveyed? >> 80 to 100,000 are yet to be surveyed. >> do you know how many total? >> the number of surveyed properties are approximately 31,000. >> so we're 25% there. , approximately. >> approximately. >> and post 1974 are the other? the post 1974 and vacant parcels are the others, yeah. so as i'll mention later when we talk about methodology, 1974s right now are the cut-off date and anything after that would not be age eligible at this point.

>> depends how long it takes to do the survey. [ laughter ] >> any other questions? >> so over the past several years, the department has various software platforms for the survey and selected to use arch's software as a platform. so what a arches? an open source, geospacially enabled software for inventory and management developed by the getty constitution and graphic. it is an integrated survey and management program that allows for data input from a variety of data sources which is texts, a written text, photograph, pdfs, audio files, video files, et cetera and in the management

based on data models. the getty conservation institute are continuing to provide technical support as we configure the arch's software platform. some other municipalities are los angelos for their survey l.a. program and lincoln, england and i have a couple of examples of websites in the next slights. we've included the web addresses to go and click through in your spare time just for fun. and so here is one example in louisiana. and the cane river national heritage area implemented arches to publish information about them to the public and we included this screenshot to show how marchs can incorporate historic base maps and this database also includes audio recordings of oral histories.

the next example is from lincoln, england where they help to protect the heritage of their city and that allows you to search by resource type and allows you to search by historic period, so you can find resources that are only from, in this case, they're looking at, like, some pretty old resources. so it has a wheel that allows you to see what they've got in each sort of time period. and then this slide is from our pilot survey from the past summer of the ashberry. ash bury. as far as we know, san francisco is one of the first to use this software for direct data

collection and survey l.a. created their own data tool and created it from there into arches, which we would like to avoid having do and i'll talk about why we think we won't have to do that, which is one of the reasons that we wanted to use arch, because it does have the capability to collect data directly into it. it's not a great capability, which is why, as i'll talk in the next slide, they've created a mobile data collection app for it that we hope will solve many of the bugs. survey, staff and interns conducted a pilot survey to test arches as well as draft survey methodology and collected field data on approximately 800 properties and provided

significant feedback so the department and based on that feedback, we've been revising the method ol anology and arch's database. as i just mentioned, a key component of the arch's platform and the imminent release of which we are keenly awaiting is called arch's collector which is a companion for arches. while we were able to i im imdu' donutimput datadirectly and we s collection app will take care of some of that so this will allow multiple users with preset access permissions to collect data in the field online or off-line. this ability to collect data off-line is particularly useful, as surveyors during the pilot have long waits to upload

particularly photographs directly into arches. so with this, we can actually collect the data for whatever reason, they're wi-fi wasn't working or was taking too long and you don't want to be standing on the sidewalk outside of a property longer than you need to. they can actually do that data collection off-line and it would save and sync back in the office. another issue during the survey was theinability for the off-line and every time you would open the collection application on your tablet, they would all sort of reshuffled, which made it -- it caused a lot of extra inefficiencies jumping around. you want to say everyone about windows no one shot, go to a storefront, et cetera, and it was hard to did that, but sounds like from what we've heard, that

this new application will eliminate that problem and we'll be able to make those choices, set those fields, preset everything, each including the geographic boundaries that this particular surveyor is limited to, the start time we would give them access to these preset fields, et cetera, et cetera. so we're hopeful that will help with the survey process in the field. i will pause again for questions. over past couple of years, development staff have been reflecting best practices and preservation fields, meets standards for survey and can be completed in the most resource efficient manner.

so what will we be recording? individual resources, including building, structures, objects, natural features, as well as districts, cultural landscapes. we'll be creating an individual record of everything we record within the arch's database. each record will include at minimum a photograph, a physical description based on selections from drop-down menus, a historic theme or context if one is associated, assessment of physical integrity, a status code or similar evaluation and a link to any related records. that linkin linking ability is something important in the selection of arches because given the amount of legacy data that we have in many different forms, it's likely that, you know, where we have gpr forms, a

pdf, if there's one representatived to it, a property would be linked or have the cabl capability to be linked directly to a record and that's probably how we'll -- we're still trying to figure out how we'll integrate all of that legacy data. but that is one method, creating those links. so the methodology of what will

be evaluated. so again, building structures, objects, features, et cetera that were constructed on or before 1974 and associated with significant theme or context and retain integrity. so if any of those things are not the case, we would not actually be evaluating their status. they may get a record and a photograph, but they would not necessarily get a status code. or properties that are identified by the public. so essentially if the public gives us information and says i, public person, think that x property is something, we're automatically -- we'll look at that, no matter if -- as long it's before 1974. but it doesn't have to have all of the other elements. it's basically, if the public wants to tell us about something

and they think it's worthy of being looked at, we'll look at it. the evaluation will be context-based and we will be evaluating for national register and california register eligibility under criteria a1, b2 or c3. we are in the process of selecting a consultant to develop a methodology for tangible and intangible cultural aspects and we think this will help us get at criteria a and b. resources that we've sometimes had adult difficulty with and se we have that methodology deliverable from the consultant, we will be integrated into the greater methodology to get back to the cultural heritage questions. >> i had a question to maybe

clarify this first category about the bucket of buildings or properties being evaluated to understand this. so let's say there a building, it's not associated, just a great piece of architecture from 1920, art deco or something but not associated with any particular theme or context statement, just a really cool building, school building. would that be evaluated? >> yes. >> just because of its potential architectarchitecturalarchitect. >> yes. we would assume that we will be dropping those themeses and contexts further and that architecture in and of itself would be sort of an overarching theme or context and then there would be afte after art deco as.

in the modern theme, there would be a weighing of art deco and architectural design approach if san francisco during x to y period. yes, that would fall under that bucket. >> just wanted to make sure it wasn't too narrow. >> a question about the consultant that you'll be retaining, they'll be using existing methodology t methodol? >> hopefully they'll be developing their own -- >> including inclusive? >> yes and we wanted them to look at tangible and intangible and really come up with sort of a new -- i don't know if new approach is necessarily the right word but a way to really

get at those cultural heritage assets in a way that we haven't before. and so the two primary components we're hoping to get out of this are about how we apply the methodology in the survey to the criteria, as well as how we conduct outreach in general to get to the cultural heritage assets that are out there, both tangible and intangible. and i can send you a link to the rfp. >> i'm definitely interested in making sure that when they review the intangibles that we're going to go far beyond the box. >> if you could forwards qrp to all of us. >> sure. >> and just quickly, i don't want to get too far into the weeds, but have you articulated

into the rp social or cultural anthropologist skillset? >> not specifically, no. >> maybe something to think about as an addendum? if we were thinking outside of the box. >> we could definitely get more specific into the scoping and contracting phase of it. >> commissioner? >> i had one other technical question relative to the data and the information that's in the property information map and the drawings of dbi or other sources. are the arches, do they all work together? are you bringing in a ready collected data into the arch's system? >> we are in the process of figuring what data will live in arches or pim or other arches

that already exist and also how arches and the property information map will talk to each other, but they definitely have that capability and we intended that they would retain a direct link. so that even if -- hopefully it won't have to but even if you have to go to the property, in the address in the property information map, you would be able to just, under the preservation tab or similar link, hit a link and it would take you to the arches and contain all of the information. our intent is that arches will contain all of the information from this survey, as well as previous surveys. >> there's so much data we have already and how to use it all. >> definitely. >> a lot may not be digitzed. >> exactly. there's a lot of that that needs to happen. it sometimes wakes me up in the middle of the night, but yeah, it's absolutely the intent that

arches will be the repository for our preservation program information. and it has the capability beyond survey to contain information about other aspects of our program. so the rest of the bullets here, that we would be looking at findings from previous informal surveys or as i mentioned earlier, district determinations from hr-ers, properties that would still get evaluated. and taking a look at any assessments we make as part of our new historic resource assessment process and that would be kind of our second check on those assessments, to confirm and then those findings from those assessments, depending on whether they change or not were be incorporated into the survey for that particular area. what will not be evaluated are

any properties previously designated to the california register or local register or properties previously evaluated in area of plan surveys. it would include planning department, staff and interns, a survey advisory group, the historic preservation commission, obviously, as well as technical support from the gety conservation institute and graphics and, of course, the public. so for our survey advisory group, we're envisioning two components, which would be that one we would have a core group of six to eight members that would meet on a regular basis and would be established for the duration, essentially, of the