the city. throughout an entire year, 365 days, you could see 400 species of birds in sanfrancisco which is phenomenal since we're this the pacific flyway and then land ma'amammals and amphibians and 5 and in the presido, they counted 58 species of native bees alone. plants is an interesting and important for the discussion today in terms of what we do. i mentioned there are 7 to 8,000 species of plants in california and just thi in in san francisco alone, there's 460 native plants

to san francisco. so when we contemplate taking that wonderful diversity that we have in the natural area such as twin peaks and bring it in for more resilient landscape, we have an incredible pallette to work and at this point, i'll turn it over to lisa. >> we can help sanfrancisco to be a green space and each time we turn pavement, it's an opportunity for us to turn grey into green and how we plant that green and what species we choose makes a difference if we're supporting biodiversity outcomes. it helps us to maximu us maximis

and helps us to connect to nature daily. so we spent a good amount of time the last couple of years helping to get the city to pass as a san francisco biodiversity policy. in april it passed unanimously at the board of supervisor. the genesis of that work was part of work order and it was peter and then myself and then adam and gill looking at all of the codes and policies on the books across the departments and where are we mentioned bio diversity and greening? we found it but it was ad hoc and we thought, let's try to make a more powerful statement for the city, help elevate this as a san francisco value. and so in part, we realized experts like peter that can't be at every meeting and every project review, likewise, staff who are trained to interface with projects and care about this, it always is, of course, helpful when you have a clear

policy direction to point to. for example, we do now have biodiversity mentioned in all of our major waterfront project design guidelines but would that have hatched i not provided alle reviews and we don't rely on that but institutionalize this. also, you know, for years, we hear stories about mta has a budget for vision zero to build a new street and sidewalk but that doesn't include money for landscaping. when it goes to public works for the construction drawings and they implement it, they won't add greening because there's to money for maintenance. so like our ordinance last year, we want to get this above the kind of department to department fray and we've been working closely with these 15 departments. so how did we get to this policy? >> thank you. i'm back.

so these are the 15 city departments with whom we're collaborating to basically try to lift up biodiversity throughout the city family to operationallize as lisa eluded to. the way this started, five years ago, i started convening this group of departments and we is been working together on creating sessiocreating vision d what are the holes to fill in termsfus of getting the work doe and that lead to may 23, 2017, our commission of the environment actually passed a resolution that identified five city-wide goals and you'll look at those in a moment and then, a year later, as lisa just said, last year, we passed a resolution at the board supervisors unanimously on apri. and so, since then, we've been implementing that resolution and this is actually the first

resolved clause in the resolution which i'll read. sanfrancisco is the place where our local biodiversity thrives and ecosystems that integrate healthy wildlife and health habitats throughout the city's environment connecting all of san francisco to nature daily and inspiring stewardship of our heritage in every neighborhood. so i think we've covered some of the points, but bottom line is, we are working really hard this spring to kind of meet the resolved clauses that were in the resolution at the board of supervisors and that includes all of the departments kind of file a survey, filling out a template that looked across all of their work and what they were doing as it related to biodiversity and we spit that back out to everybody to try to figure out what are the priorities. but also to highlight what's great about what's going on. so we did that exercise and then

all of the departments are articulating their commitments such as what's happening here today. so the port commission passed a resolution, i think last week or two weeks ago, that there was a presentation made by staff at the library commission which was well-received and the airport commission passed a resolution, so we're making a lot of progress and several other the departments have written mem mes and sent those to their leadership and let's see. is that it? >> notably public works in mta are signed on as public commitments. >> yes, i think that's it. ors, and then those are the goals. and so as lisa said, the idea behind all of this, creating kind of a guiding vision and goals was to have a kind of concise set of values, right, something to aspire to, that is

the most current thinking language, what we -- the vision we want to see for ourselves, for the city. so the vision that i read is kind of broken down into five goals. as we've been talking about as in the slides i showed you, biologically rich ecosystems, connecting to nature. everybody connected to nature, ecological planning and design as was being emphasized today, of course. and then community stewardship and empowering people and partnerships to take care of nature in all of the nakeds and neighborhoods and i can't read the last one. resilience in climate planning. so using nature. the best example, when we talk about the shoreline and sea level rise, how we resign our shore landscape tline to be resh the sea-level rise.

>> so now is the part we get to celebrate the grea great thingse planning department is doing. these were daylighted through the survey that we completed last october. you know, in order to do that in an effective way, i convened in a new interagency team and we had representatives from environmental planning and design folks to mang sure we're capturing all of the places the planning department and then the second half of the survey was thinking about the future opportunities. so highlighting some of the successes, of course, better roofs and we're the first city to your a compliance of the living roof. of course, that provides great co-benefits not open to habitat and pie yand bio diversity, com,

happiness, et cetera. i would like to highlight in the central sum of plan, we have pushed beyond that regulation and in central soma, 150 feet tall buildings which only it applies up to ten floors are required 50% of the roof in addition to the solar requirement. and just in central soma, if you hadn't heard the statistics, it's 20 acres of living roof in an area that we know is one of the city's greatest and air-impacted neighborhoods. more highlights, things that we have been doing and some for a long time, of course, better streets, living alleys, our bird-safe design stars, the first city in the country to pass those. we just hosted a delegation from singapore last week and andrew perry did a great demonstration and looking way to boltster requirements and then the urban design guidelines. we've been sure to start integrating this language in

these documents. also, these are some highlights from the work order itself. last year, we completed a street tree census so we have a database. we understand every street tree, what type it is, how it's doing and the statistics that i was most excited about was there are 35,000 vacant street tree wells. so as we can connect that to projects redeveloping or a new projects and get trees in the ground, that would be a great partnership with public works. of course, the urban forest plan, the green connection's plan was done awhile ago but we're thinking how to integrate that and inform our built environment. last, i would like to highlight the sf plant tool and that's been online for a few years but we continue improvements. most notably in the last year and a half, we added the city pallettes to this tool and worked with public tools, rec park to pilot this in their

project and it allows staff to, say, with the thriftfy fifty and they can add tools through pollinators and certain flowers and focus on native species. we're excited to keep being a tool and that's something the department hosts and maintains. this is a list of the ongoing and future opportunities that we brainstorm together in the department and we have pulled from this list to create the resolve clauses that you see before you today. so i'm not going to go into them here. so lastly, the last section is the review of the planning resolution before you and we want to just take a moment to reexplain that this was part of the board of supervisor's resolution a year ago, asking all departments within a year of that, to make their own public statements.

so here we are in earth month again before you to recommend the adoption of this resolution. you know, part of it, the planning department has a unique position and a great perspective and purview for how we can support this vision. through our lan use principalling, design control, through inner-face with a built environment with project sponsors that a lot of other departments who actually manage natural areas don't necessarily have. we also have looking to improve our surrounding environment, to improve our neighborhood, quality of life, to mitigate biological resource impacts through sequa, et cetera. the last point as planners, we're natural conveners, we work with a lot of other departments. when we're in the room with folks working on the design for fulsome street, we can be a part of the voices in the room championing greening. so finally, the resolution

includes eight resolved clauses. the first, they're organized in three basic groups. the first is things in the planning code and ways we can build on that and the second group is really about how to institutionalize biodiversity and create it like a lense to what we're doing with equity work. the last piece a collaboration and what are we wanting to commit to doing with our fellow departments, kind of as this working group. so in terms of the code, we talked about the bird safe standards. we have two areas of the code where we do require greening. those have coincidently come up today about the frontyards. i did not plot that item to go before my item. but also living roofs. so in those areas, though, how can we promote the right types of plants and went people are getting complaints about them in

the sunset because they're paving over their frontyard and how can we help them respond with the biodiversity guidelines. the sec chunk of code is requiring open space but we don't require greening. the rear yard came up, roof decks came up today. so we do have open space requirement, rear yard setbacks, certain things about better streets, our open spaces and how can we dig in and think about greening as an element of that. and then, right types of greening. we are cognizant that we're growing, dens denseifying. the climate spaces are more important than ever. i was talking to the biggest living roof designer and installer in the city and they

have statistics about the drop in temperature that occurs within a certain distance from a living wall. how can the planning department empower those solutions. in terms of the biodiversity lense, we developed a biodiversity training and we ran a beta test with folk at planning and other agencies but we're excited to roll that out to a larger staff. finally, in collaboration, we drafted the biodiversity design guidelines as part of the work order and now we have at least five agencies signed on to help us make those real and into a website, something used by the public in their own private yard or given to a developer, like provide some consistency, you know, from, like, the city, not necessarily just from planning about here is what we hope to see. and again, just all of this takes ongoing commitment.

people showing up at meetings, showing up at the table and many people feeling emparamedic to start using term terms like biodiversity. that's the conclusion and we're pleased to give this for your consideration and adoption. thank you. >> thank you, miss fisher, great work. >> so with that, we will take a public comment on this item. i do have a couple of speaker cards susan kuransteph and tom dulan. anyone who wants to speak, go to the left and come on up. >> i'm from the san francisco resident and with california native plant society and i want to thank the san francisco planning department and planning of department for hosting and creating the san francisco plant finder tool. this tool permits residents,

landscapers, developers and city agencies to select plants that will not only survive in san francisco but that will also enhance san francisco's biodiversity but this suggests successful native plante plantsd native plants are for the food web that provide wildlife and insects and wild birds to survive in the city with the rest of us. so not only is this is a useful tool, but this business card format is a wonderful way of marketing it and so, peter basteau who developed a business card gave him to the plant society and says we use that when we're out in public to help new gardeners find a way to discover the plants that are best for them.

so thank you so much for the superb support for san francisco and for california's biodiversity resolutions. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> five years ago when i started to come here to talk about the alterations that were demolitions, one ever the things that werone of the thingsthat we so-called monster homes would take the yard and make it part of the building. and you would see it with privacy fences which are constantly being lacquered, relaxerinre lakquering their pry fence and putting in a turf.

i know this isn't about private space but when somebody comes into the staff with a project and say what are you planning for your rear yard? if you do an excavation or make it a bunker? so i think it's not just the public space but private space can do that, too, and maybe that's something the staff can do and when you have a cr or dr. thank you very much. >> thank you, miss shitis. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioners. i'm the executive director ofliable city here to speak in favour of this resolution. i'm an environmentalist who lives in the city and i love that i can live in a dense neighborhood. i can walk and bike to a zillion

places and that i have bumble bees and we can sustain biodiversity cities. this wisdom is, oh, well, pack the biodiversity because it's here. we nee need to do it with finese and preserve the green that's here there's health and happiness benefits from greening. there's a lot of data and this should be data driven. look for how greening neighborhoods, views of green and how it makes us happier and healthier. the city of cambridge, massachusetts, did surveys about happiness and they said if you live on a street with trees, for example, it's the equivalent in terms of health of being four years younger and it was the

quiequivalent of being $10,000 0 wealthier. u.s. planners can't $10,000 a year into anybody's pocket and you can't make them four years younger but you can make them healthier and happier and you can do that things like the planning code and the public benefits that come from development. things that we were talking about earlier. if you in a rear yard, some green in it. so it would require us to think about the public open spaces in a different way. a quarter of the land area is in the right-of-way, city streets, using to move and store automobiles. so making your developments less automobile dependent is certainly a way to do that but seeing if we can reclaim that space for people is another way promote health, happiness and bio diversity and we support the goals of this resolution and that they will translate from

good policy goals into standards, guidelines and practices so that we can have a city that is much greener and more biodiverse. a lot of. landscapers use the same floor plants or and over. it will help on resiliency mentioned around climate change, reducing flooding, reducing the heat waves on the effect those have on seniors who live without air conditioning. will make the city more habitable, more happier and healthier. so please do it, thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment on this item? with that, public comment is now closed. commissioner moore. >> amazing presentation. i learned a lot. i was sitting here saying wow, i

didn't have any idea. i hope this will be on the department's website, easier to fine and marvelous and i wish it could be shown and the audience stage would be larger. i am in full support of it. no other questions, except wanting to push it forward to start working on it as quickly as possible, including how we look at the design and implementation of this, how we support and sustain our open spaces. how we support the departments for better streets, et cetera, et cetera. it works in the same direction and i'm happy and proud that the department has prior to this, done a lot of work in the right to action that is coming together at an extremely important time. >> thank you, commissioner. commissioner johnson. >> so i just want to thank mr. sherman for your leadership and the department of the environment and just your

leadership and really, i think, convening lots of city departments around this issue and finding ways that we can all kind of be speaking and working with one voice to our commitment for biodiversity. you know, i think it was spot on to say we have a unique perspective as we live and breathe the changes in the environment to really hold to the unique and amazing and beautiful place that we are in and really understanding the diversity and the opportunity to continue that biodiversity throughout how we're building and making that easier for people both to celebrate and to implement. and then going along with implementation, i think resolution, i'm thrilled to support it and i think it would be helpful to hear how

implementation goes over time because as much support as we have for this, we want to make sure that folks are kind of translating it into their different pieces of work. so i would welcome hearing a report back at some point in the future about how it's going and how we can help. >> thank you, commissioner hillis. >> thank you, miss fisher. just a question on rear yards. are there other jurisdictions that have regulations or incentives to do things in rear yards, that we could emulate? and by the way, every month is earth month for me. [ laughter ] >> me, too. >> i wait sever wait 11 months . [ laughter ] >> our intra-agency team is starting to dig into that. we have been looking at, like, seattle has a green be factor. in portland, they do

biodiversity yard certifications, where you get a cool plaque in the front of your yard and part of a garden tour. we're starting to look at both, what are the stick opportunities? but it's a little intimidating of a space, private rear yards but we definitely are game and have started to dig into what opportunities are and that would be a great example of something we could bring back. >> that would be great to hear how we can do that, because i know we have focused on frontyards, but anybody who looks back in their rear yards, there's broad diversity of how neighbours treat them and what we do with it. but if there could be an incentive, p crustuc, sewer, for people to use backyards in a different way, that would be great. >> there is a puc grant for

doing this is your backyard because i applied and got it. so i have turf that's ai irriga. so you can always forward those people to me. >> commissioner kopel. >> great job and glad to see everybody is on board. living near golden gate park on 34th avenue and litterly, i've never had it quantified but definitely feel it everyday i get to walk outside and look at that park as opposed to concrete and more houses. so definitely supportive today. >> commissioner richards. >> it's amazing. i learned a lot, especially with the number of different types of plants and mammals. when i moved to sanfrancisco, i didn't see mammals and now we have a raccoon problem and we

have coyotes and i don't know what's going on, we're building things out and still the animals are coming in. interestingly enough, i think -- and the idea of an outdoor livingroom, i'm guilty of that, miss shudish, but i don't astroturf down. we our gravel down in the backyard because we don't want to have a lawn to water. but all of the planters boxes on the side, i should check your plant finder whether we got the better ones or not. my next door neighbor let's his yard grow completely grow over and it's pretty -- brambles and it's green but there's bugs coming out and the racoons there and there should be some standard for a level of care for your open space.

one other comment to mr. radulovic, let's pack everybody into san francisco. i think we should be working with our state delegation to offer concession or incentive, you're not taking away from the biodiversity or liveability both for humans, animals or plants. but i would strongly suggest that because we had a planning commission hearing on one of my favorite topics and it took the density bonus and took the building to the rear yard. so, you know, you have down here on page 3, yard requirement. those things are traded these days. i think we should work with state delegation to do exemption for biodiversity. >> thank you. peter and lisa, thank you so much. this was an excellent presentation and really practical thinking in terms of

the work with other departments in the public. you know, i also will echo the calls from my fellow commissioners to have some kind of reports. human beings will say that this is a really great idea, we love the bees, we love the plants until it inconveniences us in some way personally. it's great to have less cars unless you take away my parking. so i'm lucky and live in a neighborhood with lots of open space. about five years ago, the coyotes moved in and i saw marked changes in my environment. i'm an avid gardener and there was the gofer population plummeted and the ferile cats. the hawks came back. and so these are just things that i observed being outdoors.

there were more changes but my neighbors are going nuts about the coyotes. so part of what i'm suggesting, there is a culture change, change about aesthetic standards. changes of being able to live in the natural environment. that we may not be used to, really, after so many years. i would be interested in how it will change people's behaviour habits, culture and what the outcome will be and are we can increase the biodiversity five, tense years from now. i think it will be great. but i'm really so grateful for your leadership and for the good work of the department and for also being at the forefront of this work. so commissioner moore. >> this is a question only for

peter and for lisa. is the san francisco plan finder enough of an educational tools for citizens to have a copy of it so when they make planned choices for planter boxes, yards or whatever, that they have a better understanding to contribute to the larger hole and be more responsive to what we need? it would be great to see that used in experimental gardens where school children learn first to be outside because we need take you seriously here and here is how you find it. >> commissioner richards. >> move to adopt. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners, on that motion to adopt the

resolution. (roll call). >> that motion passes unanimously 6-0. commissioners that will place us on item 12 for case number 2017, 16041 pc for phase three, chinatown, this is an initiation. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm the manager of legislative affairs. this would initiate the organization for the districts. this started five years ago. as an effort to standardize the definitions and planning code and to create one format for all zoning districts. remember that far back? the first phase of this project tackled article two, while the

second phase focused on article 7. the last phase will work on the eastern neighborhood districts. reviewing this ordinance, they identified several substantive changes. these are outlined in the staff report and the letter sent to the commission by ccdc. staff does not see significant issues with the items or including the items in the final ordinance but is leaving that decision to you all. since the amendments would be substance activity. substantive. they're recommending the proposed planning change and set a hearing date on or after may 9. thank you. >> that's it? no other comment? >> we will take public comment on this item. i have one card, ray chan, but

anyone else who wants to provide public comment can please come up. >> good afternoon, commissioners. roadway chan chinatown cdc. i wanted to thank aaron star as well as supervisor peskin's office on this project, just to ensure that it reflects the reorganization reflects the intent of the chinatown zoning adopted in 1987 which has actually over 30 years preserved chinatown from encroachment from the downtown high-rise development from coming in and this is important it's done right. as mentioned, i would like to introduce -- as we've been exploring two substantive co-changes in the visitor region, through feedback from the community, the first one encourages more nighttime small

business activity by making the nighttime entertainment use conditional and removing a current condition that restricting that used to be tied to a restaurant, so that the community can vet entertainment uses on a case by case. with that said, to ensure large nightclubs from entering into chinatown, woe would like to wea second amendment to close a loophole allowing projects to go beyond a 5,000 square foot limit. when there's a change of use in a nonconforming structure. so together with these two amendments, we hope to encourage more nighttime activity in chinatown but at the same time to really honour the chinatown zoning in a way that continues to protect viability of small local businesses. so i want you to direct staff to work with us on that language. >> thank you. any other public comment on this

item? ok, with that, public comment is closed. commissioner hillis. >> move to initiate. with the recommendation to look at those substantive co-changes. >> as well as scheduling a hearing on or after moos may 9. >> second. >> the motion maker if we could acknowledge the staff include a conversation. >> yeah, we did. >> ok, great. >> thank you, commissioners. if there's nothing further, there's a motion seconded to initiate and schedule the hearing for adoption on or after may 19, 2019 and on that motion? (roll call). so moved, that motion passed unanimously 5-0.

placing us on item 13, scv for the city-wide cultural resource's survey presentation. >> good noon, commissioners. i'm here to present an overview of the city-wide cultural resource's survey including goalses for the survey, historians, legacy data and proposed survey staffing and budget and when jonas gets done passing those out, he can give me the slides, please. they're up, thank you.

feel free to ask questions as i go along. surveys are an integral part of my programme as they provide tools for understanding, identifying resources that give them their care and sense of place. among other things, surveys provide information needed to make informed planning decisions, develop and implement lan use policies, perform environmental reviews and assist in the identification of resources worthy of designation. although there have been many surveys conducted in san francisco since 1967 when our historic preservation programme came to life, none have approached the survey at a city-wide scale. previous surveys were generally project-based or community sponsored, focusing on a single neighborhood or single property type. in their 2013 joint report on historic preservation, spur and

fs heritage stressed a need for city-wide survey. the city-wide cultural resource's survey is intended to be a multiyear effort to identify and document places that reflect important themes in sanfrancisco's architec archited culture and history and support the new housing development. surveys are a process of identifying and gathering data on a community's historic resources and maintaining an inventory of this data. the primary components are o ofa survey are historic content which is preservation planning, describe patterns of development, of a community and region and identify important associated property types and eligibility try tear ya.

criteria. there's resource and evaluation. and this is where we identify and record the potential resources within a community or neighborhood. invent torinventory or databased outreach where we share communication with stakeholders. in the first process, it's defining methodology and looking at where you're going to be surveying. the second step is the field work and three is reporting and adopting that survey results and then four is maintaining that database. given the number of previous surveys and the variety of forms that constitute our legacy data, we have spent time reviewing past documentation efforts in an effort to determine how many properties have been surveyed previously and where properties are located across the city.

to identify historic theme and context and determine the age of building stock and how that building stock is dispersed across the city and understanding the best practices from previous studies and wider preservation community. as part of this effort, we've prepared this map identifying areas of the city that have adopted surveys. now within these shaded areas, the majority of parcels have been evaluated. the areas outlined in black represent most of the city's neighborhood commercial districts where we have a draft survey that's not yet been adopted. even with these shaded areas and the properties within them surveyed, only approximately 20% of the parcels in the city have been surveyed to date. this map is the map of the designated properties and districts that are designated either locally at the state level or at the federal level. this is just to show sort of

their distribution across the city and to demonstrate how few there actually are as compared to rest of the city. and then also meant to point out that while survey information can provide background for a designates, survey itself does not equate to designation. so one of the things the previous maps demonstrate is there are large swabs that remain to be surveyed. all of the grey areas in the previous maps are without surveys. and within these unsurveyed areas within the majority of properties are currently identified in our property database that the planning department maintains as category b, which means they're age eligible but historic resource status is unknown. so one of the primary goals of the survey is to substantially reduce the number of category b properties and increase the

number of properties that can be categorized as a, historic resource orb not a not a historic resource. it's proactive data collection that will improve response and recovery time following emergencies and reduce application costs and make everyone aware of what the property of their status -- the property of their status is before they embark on a project. (please stand by).

>> we will be evaluating properties that were built on before 1974, more than 45 years old, and that age is based upon generally the length of time that a survey takes from start to finish. so it kind of gives us that five years before the properties become 50 years that five years before the to complete the survey and to make the assessment.

and we will be evaluating for national regis sterter and california register. we are intending to do the survey field work in the evaluations in-house, with staff rather than consultants. a survey advisory group, which we intend to have two tiers, a core group that would stay with the life of the project that would consist of members of the historic preservation, advocacy groups, and city and family, and then a rotating advisory group that would have neighborhood organizations or members of the public that would change as we move through each phase so that the advisory group that we have for that phase is specific to that geography. obviously the historic

preservation commission will be providing their guidance and adopting findings. we have a technical support from the getty conservation institute, and, obviously, the public is a very important piece of the team as well. and we will be including them in focus groups as we develop the methodology as well as the cultural heritage methodology, which we are embarking on an r.s.p. for, and then we will fold it into the over all survey methodology. so as we look at this task, we are thinking about how we would phase it because it is obviously an undertaking that you can't just go out and, you know, look at everything at once. we have 80 to 100,000 properties that we believe we need to survey.

and some of the variables that we thought about for phasing are physical hazards, so disaster preparedness focus, and neighborhoods and communities that are underrepresented in our preservation programs to date, development pressures, and this could be a timely useful development tool, and an age of building stock. so the maps on this slide are -- show some of the water hazards and liquefaction zones that are some of the -- the physical hazards we've been looking at. these maps, we've been looking at the office of resiliency to coordinate and make sure we're looking at the same type of hazards that they are. and this map, although this isn't the heaviest weight of the variables we're considering, this map shows the age of the building stock and its distribution across the city. in general, it kind of

reflects -- okay. ohoh, okay. the buildings are located in the center of the city, and also throughout. earthquake is concentrated in southeast and in neighborhoods south and east of downtown. and subsequent development periods generally slant out to the south and west with infill from later periods. so the map on this slide represents what we are proposing as our phasing, although it would still need to be refined based on methodology and input from our outreach process. right now we have proposed that phase 1 would be the area in pink. the areas of phase 1 were selected because they include areas of the city

most at risk from the hazards of water and liquefaction. and they include bay view, an area with high physical hazards, and that is also generally lacking in representation in the preservation programs. and then this slide looks at our proposed budget on schedule. so based on our current fiscal year 1920 budget proposal, we are estimating that we would have about 3.15 s.t.e. to dedicate, and based on that and the number of properties we need to look at, it would take roughly six years to complete. and the various options, options one and two, and each increase the amount of f.t.e. dedicated and half, or nearly half, the amount of time that the effort would take.

and then this slide is sort of the -- some of the next steps. we will be presenting this to the land use committee of the board on the 22nd. we're doing briefings with the board members as they request them, and we'll be going back to the h.p.c. in may for an update as well. and that concludes my presentation. thank you. >> thank you, ms. lavalle. do we have any public comment on this? >> good afternoon president milguard and commissioners. i'm really pleased to be here. and i'm here to speak to the urgency and the importance of this survey. i'm aaron hyland, and i'm the president of the historic preservation commission. i have a letter for the

file. we didn't get this prepared ahead of time. i've been here about 27 years, and every year we've talked about the need to get our city surveyed. and, um, when i first arrived, san francisco was head of the game. we were the city that everyone looked for to have lessons learned on how we treat our historic resources. our preservation movement was born out of the 1950s and '60s massive redevelopment and destruction of the western edition. in 1971, heritage was created. '76, the intensive downtown survey was completed, which led to the michael corbet book in 1979, "splendid

survivors." at that point we were at the top of our game. everybody was looking at us and what we were doing. fast forward to 2002, and some very different things were happen here and in los angeles. in rancho mirage, a very beautiful house that was completely restored and completely intact was demolished. this drove mid-century people in l.a. crazy, and it launched the preservation movement in l.a. however, here in san francisco, 2002, we were just adopting the market mocktavia plan, and we were arguing how, when, and why we would need a city-wide survey. we did make some progress. we surveyed some areas in mission dolores, japan town, and between 2008 and 2013, a small portion of

the triangle was survived, and then the dibos triangle was created, but that took five years. meanwhile, in los angeles, from 2010 to 2017, thanks to some funding from the getty, they surveyed the entire city. almost 900,000 parcels. 500 square miles of property in seven years. still today in san francisco, we've only surveyed 20%, and no large focused effort. these are all individual, project-driven efforts. so it is time. it is time we need to get this survey done. we need to get it done yesterday. why? because it's not just about protecting our historic resources, but it is about identifying what is not historic. which, based on the data from the l.a. survey, and it's been confirmed with our own limited data, that

will be half the city. more than half the properties surveyed are not historic. but because we haven't done the survey, every individual project that comes before us has to go through this process of evaluating it. that takes about a year and a half to two years, delaying the project from moving forward. so currently with current resources, it will take between six and seven years to complete our survey. [buzzer] >> what i'm asking is for your support to get this done in half that time. we're currently trying to break free the post-entitlement projects. mayor breed is really pushing to get those post-entitlement projects moving. if we don't get this survey done, when those

projects are done, we'll have a backlog on pre-entitlement. what we're asking is for you to join us. we'll be speaking with the mayor and each of the supervisors, and we want to increase the funding. we've had a lot of conversations about this. there is the mayor's directive of not adding additional staff head count, but this is really important. it will save us time now, and it will save us money later. thank you. >> chairwoman: thank you, commissioner. next speaker, please. >> i saw the file for the historic preservation hearing, and i wanted to see a map of nowe valley, but i couldn't make it big. and i called mr. webster, and he made me a map. for $75 and you can have one to. these are the boundaries of nowe valley, not mine.

and as you can see, there is a lot of blue and green and light green. and all of that is world war ii, and all of the blue is pre-1906, and this is your information. and i have a p.t. f., i can send you, and it's all old redwood, and i think because of the number of older buildings in many portions of nowe valley, should be considered an historic district. and as you know, historically, nowe valley was part of the mission. my neighbor who lived on nmy street always told people she lived in the mission. nowe valley is an older neighborhood on the east side of the city. some of the blocks with the john an anderson homes

are already potential historic buildings. six homes behind me have been designated as a potential historic district because the contractor was the same contractor as this building. while not all of the blocks in nowe valley may be homogeneous, older east side neighborhoods are infilled, and i think this development pattern should be looked at a plus and not a minus because it tells the story of the neighborhood and the city. for example, my lot is 17b on the block. originally 17 was one large lot of nearly 80 feet in width. a house is built in 1932 on 17a. and my house was built in 1941 as part of the post-war bloom. the resource study should receive a lot of support

and should be completed as quickly as possible. i like the two and a half years thing, even faster. [buzzer] >> if the staff wants some pesky volunteers in various neighborhoods to help out, that is a good thing. all of this housing seems like it could be open for simple remodels and that's a better way to preserve all of this housing. thank you very much. >> chairwoman: thank you very much. any other public comment on this item? public comment is closed. commissioner richards. >> i've been on my bull bully pulpit on surveys for quite sometime. i think given what we've got coming out of sacramento, it is time we actually get really serious. in a department of 270 people, whether they're there or not hired yet or they've left or whatever, we need to really figure this out.

if you look across the bills, sb50 points to sequel in terms of the historic preservation, and the density bonus says no state or federal law can be broken. the housing accountability act points to sequa, and the acts you have to be listed on the national are state register. and sb4 will probably merge with sb5050 -- it states you have to be listed on the national state or local. and then sb330, which i mentioned before, had required that the level of historisity needs to bemony at time of application. if you take that and go, oh, we only surveyed 20% of the city, and i come in on a parcel or a building