due to the increased incidents of violence against the appi community since the start of the pandemic, and addressing xenophobia is more important than other. when incidents of hate in san francisco make up 39% of bay-area incidents and the bay area is making up nearly a fourth of the a.p.i. hate crime incidents, this coalition is critical in being able to address healing, build on work towards restorative justice and solidarity work and to prevent further harm and to promote safety in our community. i hope that you can support in supporting the community safety and justice. thank you. >> clerk: thank you very much for sharing your comments. mr. smith, bring us the next caller, please. >> caller: hello, everyone, my name is nikita sammy, i'm a south asian public defender and the vice president of the asian

criminal trial association and we are devastated by the attacks on our asian community and we stand in solidarity with supervisor mar and the appi advocates and victims of this violence. in looking ways to protect our asian-american brothers and sisters, rather than a broken system, we must invest in community-based solutions. we have relied too long on police and prosecution and prisons to protect us from racialized violence. these institutions are systematically bias, disproportionate and dehumanizing. these institutions have failed in the last 170 years to remedy the root causes of violence in our community. we need to increase police presence, to have bureaucracy or to push for more incarceration.

we call to invest in our community and to prioritize support for mental health and treatment and restorative justice and responses to racialized violence. to bring all people together, including our black, indigenous, communities to promote unity. we cannot charge and punish our way out of this moment. we must partner together to have a society where we can live and thrive as individuals and in community. thank you so much, everyone. >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments. mr. smith, can you bring us the next caller, please. >> caller: good afternoon, i am ashley vanett, here from safe and sound, a family violence council. thank you for calling this hearing. we condemn the rhetoric and the violence against asian and asian-american and pacific

islander communities and the acts of oppression on elderly people. we stand in solidarity with the communities and acknowledge that these recent attacks are not isolated incidents, but, rather, the result of the legacy of anti-aapi violence and xenophobia and we must remain vigilant to the way that the bias and prejudice affect us and to continue to work to have actional ways to address this and all forms of prejudice, stigmatizaton and racism. we applaud the city's efforts to expand the safety teams and to have self-help for the elderly senior programs. we know how important it is to meet people where they are and to provide services in a safe, welcoming atmosphere and in a multilingual and a culturally responsive manner. we ask you to acknowledge how racism with tightening law enforcement can exacerbate

issues and inflict trauma on the appi community. we call on the city to invest in trusted grassroots and community-based resources in order to strengthen support for appi seniors. today we ask all san franciscans to combat anti-appi racism and address the devastating impacts, thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. mr. smith, can we have the next caller, please. >> caller: hi, my name is leanne and i'm calling to report our (indiscernible) members and i will be sharing a statement. i am ben chen, a 10th grader at loyola high school and a member (indiscernible) and during this pandemic there's been a lot of racial tensions between the different races accusing each other of being the problem. more specifically the ongoing tensions between the black and the asian communities worry me. the negative stereotypes that

many asians and blacks have about each other are counter product to societal progress. these negative stereotypes have often translated to real life tragedies, and in order to solve these racial problems i believe that we need to solve these problems at the source. starting at the racist stereotypes being spread around at the local community. more resources that are community driven such as this will provide the stereotypes that we have about each other. i demand additional coordination and funding to be diverted to the resources where anti-racial progress can be made. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. mr. smith, can you bring us the next caller, please. >> good afternoon, i'm crystal van and i'm with chinese for affirmative action and i'll translate the testimony from joyce li from san francisco on asian violence and community

safety. i'm deeply saddened and afraid of the recent attacks and violence against asians in the united states. a nation of immigrants from different cultures and ethnicities. the problems of racial discrimination is not new, but as the former president made racist remarks during last year's pandemic and led others to target and blame asians for bringing the virus into the united states. and it's worsened the discrimination against asians. for example, at the beginning of the pandemic as we wear masks to protect not only ourselves and others from the virus, that we were verbally abused and beaten and accused of having and spreading the virus. now that the san francisco unified school district is quickly reinstating physical classes in schools, i as a parent am more concerned than ever of the safety of my children regarding discrimination and violent attacks. i implore our representative and the members of the government to not make racist remarks and to

strengthen the ethnic studies and cultural competencies at younger ages and to understand the immigration history and the contributions of asians in the united states. i hope to mitigate the problem through educational channels. furthermore, it's crucial that our government have adequate resources for those who face language barriers that have been heightened during the pandemic. so that all groups can eliminate the problem of racial discrimination and may form a harmonious community of mutual aid and support. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, crystal yen for the translation of those comments. mr. smith, can you bring us the next caller, please. >> caller: well, commissioners, my name is francesco de costa and i have been an advocate for 40 years. this hearing is about crime and

violence targeting the asian-american seniors. i want to remind you that 40% of our population are seniors. and you supervisors and the mayor haven't done a needs assessment. i challenge you that months ago that we should have sunday all f our seniors some type of information about the discussion that is being had at this meeting. our seniors are dying. another from racist remarks and during this pandemic. i repeat, our elders, our seniors, asians and others are dying. and we are talking about this,

that and the other and not focusing on our elders. and we have a younger generation that hasn't been taught to respect the seniors. that's on us. i'm a senior. but i take every opportunity to tell our youngsters to respect their seniors. and they listen to me. so let's stop talking in circles about this, that and the other, and let us do a major assessment on the 40% of our seniors and take action. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you, mr. de costa. mr. smith, you can bring us the next caller, please.

is there a caller on the line? >> caller: yeah, thank you very much to the supervisors for creating this space for the community to voice our safety concerns. my name is canwin wynn on behalf of the southeastern asian staff and it's to have a healthy and self-sufficient asian-american community. for over 40 years we have dedicated to lifting children, youth and families from cambodia and laos and vietnam out of poverty. we work with those for needs and skills to build successful futures. with the rise of violence against our community, the challenges that we face have increased. there's amplified trauma and barriers, with the paralyzing fear that at any moment of the day that when leaving their homes that they will become a

target of violence. the antiasian hate has hit our efforts, as some of our clients refuse to attend appointments out of fear of being attacked. and some expressed that they are afraid to go for food, just to stay safe. and we need to reestablish safety for the aapi community and the district. the following are just some ideas and activities that we hope that you would consider. one, pool resources and best practices with various community-based organizations and organize solidarity movements to stop anti-asian hate in the neighborhood. two, in language personal safety training resources for community members. three, have standard training for community members. four, additional chaperons for our elders to and from appointments and errands.

five, promote open and outdoor spaces for neighborhood community appreciation. six, open one single platform in which they can connect with each other and, finally, have racial education opportunities. thank you very much, supervisors. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. mr. smith, can you bring us the next caller, please. >> caller: hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: yes, we can, please begin. >> caller: okay. so i question the wisdom of the victims' services proposal, because, you know, we have social services in the city and so i don't understand why the district attorney's office wouldn't refer victims to social services and why, you know, the various social services couldn't

have, you know, specialized programs for victims of violent crimes or other crime. so, i mean, the district attorney's office is not a social services agency. it's designed to prosecute defenders. so i don't understand why we're turning the district attorney's office into a social service agency. this is not clear to me. you know, the district attorney's office has a mission and it should be on that, instead of becoming a social service agency. so if the district attorney's office could better coordinate with the social service office that might be a better solution than simply expanding its budget. >> clerk: thank you.

are there further callers in the queue? >> there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. >> great, thank you. public comment is now closed. i want to thank everyone, all of the community members and the advocates who have spoke during public comment and -- yeah, thank you so much and for all of the work that you're doing around these urgent issues. colleagues it's been a very long hearing so i'll be brief. it's clear that there are many programs and initiatives by many departments and agencies trying to prevent violence and we need a greater understanding of how they're similar and different and where there are redundancies and where there can be areas of collaboration. and the range of anti-racism and violence is great, and not just stopping hate crimes but we need a spectrum of policies to meet these various needs across both non-law enforcement and law

enforcement agencies. at the same time we need to ensure that where prejudice exists and that investigations are adequate and there's fair and effective consequences. community-based organizations have truly stepped up to meet a large gap in rapid victim response, and educating and supporting the community around public safety. however, the onus should not be on our community organizations to figure out what city agencies are doing and what resources are available. we as a city always need to step up. given the testimony this afternoon i'm committing to funding public safety work in the asian-american community as a top priority in our upcoming budget. this could include supporting the community's capacity to provide community safety infrastructure in language and culturally acceptable ways. victim wrap around services and care management, expanding the community street outreach and restorative programming,

cross-cultural racial organizing and multipronged strategies to address the root causes of violence. i'm complitting to the development also of a city-wide plan to prevent violence and crime and to support victims in harmed communities with adequate language access and culturally competent services. i ask that the department, law enforcement and non-law enforcement agencies come together and to work with community partners to devise this plan which is so urgently needed. i would like to see the first meeting convened in april in a proposed plan presented by the end of may. and a second hearing to be called some time in june. so, colleagues, today i will make a motion to -- to table this hearing -- or to continue this hearing to the call of the chair. and along with supervisor chan, we will be bringing forth a resolution formalizing our request, and i urge you, colleagues to stand in

solidarity and to support this critical work. thank you. colleagues, do you have any closing remarks before we wrap up this hearing? supervisor chan? >> supervisor chan: well, chair mar, and supervisor stefani and supervisor haney, thank you so much for really allowing this opportunity for us to have this hearing. i really appreciate you taking just -- i want to just thank for your patience and time in hearing us out. and my takeaway for today's hearing is really this -- just hearing how our community organizations serving our asian-american appi communities have really stepped up during this time and that, you know, hearing our law enforcement agency both the police department and the district attorney's office to talk about the fact how much they are really in need of our community organizations in this time of need, assisting our communities, i really want to urge our city

departments and that is including the office of civic engagement and immigrant affairs to really think during this process of providing the city services to be inclusive, to be inclusive of our community organizations and to be inclusive in partnership and not working in silo and to work in partnership with each other with the city agencies as well as with our community organizations. and i also want to urge all of them to solidify and to really to formalize these relationships and these partnerships. we should not be dependent on them on an ad hoc style, to just call upon them because we have relationships with them, in that they would always do the right thing. so i want to urge our city departments to do that, and to formalize these relationships. thank you very much, colleagues, i appreciate your time and patience today.

>> thank you, supervisor chan. supervisor haney? >> supervisor haney: thank you, chair mar and thank you supervisor chan. and supervisor staph staph and l of the community leaders who came forward today. i think we're able to identify, you know, through the presentations both the work that is being done and i think that the work that needs to be done and some of the gaps that exist we know that when it comes to being proactive with the community outreach and the prevention, that there's a lot more that is happening and a lot more that needs to be done and the same on victims' services and supports. i just want to -- i want to provide my backing to your comments, both supervisor chan and supervisor mar and my commitment to work with both of you in the budget committee to make sure that we're prioritizing this in the coming months. so i want to make that pledge to

you and to our community partners and the departments as well that we will look at this as a priority when the departments come in front of us in the coming weeks and months. i know that supervisor mar will do that as well in his capacity as a member of the budget committee as well, so thank you again for calling this hearing and for everyone who is working so hard to keep everyone in our community safe. >> thank you, supervisor haney. supervisor stefani? >> supervisor stefani: thank you again, chair mar, for this important hearing today. it's very informative and i thank supervisor chan for joining us and for your remarks so important. and, you know, i also want to make sure that those who are watching and that the aapi community knows that we should and will find a way to conquer this issue and address this issue regardless of budget.

and it's not dependent on a budget increase, we have an obligation to help you and to solve these problems, no matter what. so, i am committed to doing that and i am committed to making sure that we work together.

>> van ness avenue runs from market street to bay street in san francisco. south vanness runs from south of market to cesar chavez street. originally residential after the 1906 earthquake it was used as a

fire break. many car dealerships and businesses exist on vanness today with expansion of bus lanes. originally marlet street was named after james vanness, seventh mayor of san francisco from 1855 to 1856. vanness heavy are streets in santa cruz, los angeles and fresno in his honor. in 1915 streetcars started the opening of the expo. in 1950s it was removed and replaced by a tree-lined median. it was part of the central freeway from bayshore to hayes valley. it is part of uses 101. it was damaged during the 1989 earthquake. in 1992 the elevator part of the roadway was removed. it was developed into a surface boulevard. today the vanness bus rapid

transit project is to have designated bus lanes service from mission. it will display the history of the city. van ness avenue.

in my small office. laura lynch. and today, she will be facilitating your hearing. i'll be working in the background, but we need to get laura's feet wet. laura, it is your show. >> thank you, jonas. welcome to the historic preservation commission remote

hearing. on february 25, 2020, the mayor declared a local state of emergency. on may 29, 2020, the mayor authorized all commissions to reconvene remotely. this will be our 19th remote hearing. attention and most of all your patience. if you are not speaking, please mute your microphone. participation, sfgovtv is broadcasting an streaming this hearing live and we'll receive public comment for each item on today's agenda. this is available by calling 1-415-655-0001. access code for today's hearing is 187 225 0784. when we reach our item and you wish to speak, press star and then 3 to be added to the queue.

when you hear you're unmuted, that is your chance to speak. each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes. you'll hear a chime indicating that your time is almost up. when time is reached, i will announce that time is up and take the next person in the queue. best practices are to call for a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and mute the volume on television or computer. commission president? >> president matsuda: here. >> commissioner black: here. >> commissioner foley: here. >> commissioner johns: here. >> commissioner nageswaran: here. >> commissioner pearlman: here. >> commissioner so: here. >> i would like to note that the charter is unique until

replacement -- [indiscernible] -- to the commission, a commissioner can remain the commission, therefore, commissioner pearlman will be serving at today's hearing. >> thank you. at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter and jurisdiction of the commission, except for agenda items. your opportunity to address the commission will be addressed when the item is reached in the meeting. members of the public, this is why you are opportunity -- your opportunity to enter the queue. if you would like to speak, press star and then 3. each member of the public will have up to three minutes to speak. i currently do not see anyone

wishing to speak on general public comment. last call for general public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed and we can move on to department matters and announcements. i do not believe we have -- >> hi there. >> i have one quick announcement i wanted to make. director is out today, but we just wanted to share with everyone good news on the permit center front. the permit center has just announced it will be reopening to the public for a lunch may 6 and full reopening on may 10. there are a still a lot of logistics coming over the next month. we're seeing a light at the end of the covid tunnel. so there will be more to come, including a public forum that

the department of inspection will be hosting. i wanted to share that with the commission as well. >> we're happy to have you and honored that you can participate. and surprising to me when you announced this is the 19th remote hearing. i feel like i've finally gotten this virtual meeting down, so i'm looking forward to seeing all of you back in person. happy april, everyone. >> thank you, president.

this takes us to consideration of adoption of draft minutes for march 3, 2021. sorry. thank you. we want to open up to public comment to see if anyone has comments on the minutes. members of the public, this is your chance to call in and make any comments related to the minutes from march 3, 2021. if you would like to do so, press star and then enter the queue. public comment is closed and that matter is before you, commissioners. >> i'd like to approve. >> second. >> president matsuda: thank you, commissioners. on that motion to adopt the minutes from march 3, 2021, commissioner black? >> commissioner black: yes. >> commissioner foley: yes. >> commissioner johns: yes. >> commissioner nageswaran: yes. >> commissioner pearlman: yes.

>> commissioner so: yes. >> president matsuda: yes. that passes unanimously. item 4, commission comments and questions. commissioners, please speak up if you have anything you would like to share or discuss. >> i think we're good. we can move on. >> thank you, president. this is the consent calendar. on that, under the consent calendar are considered to be routine by the historic preservation commission and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public or staff wish to remove the item from consent.

be considered under a separate item at a future hearing of later today. today your consent calendar includes number 5, case number 2020-01039pta at 1 kearny street. this is request for a major permit to alter. members of the public, this is your opportunity to pull the consent item off of consent to be heard later today or at the next hearing. you need to press star and then 3 to be entered into the queue. seeing there are no members of the public that wish to speak on the consent item, the matter is now yours. >> i move that we approve the consent calendar. >> second. >> president matsuda: thank you, commissioners. >> on that motion to approve item number 5 under your consent

calendar, commissioner black? >> commissioner black: yes. >> commissioner foley: yes. >> commissioner johns: yes. >> commissioner nageswaran: yes. >> commissioner pearlman: yes. >> commissioner so: yes. >> president matsuda: yes. >> thank you, commissioners. that item passes unanimously. commissioners, this takes us on to the regular calendar. your first item, 6a through g, the legry business registry applications with the following numbers, 2021-005280lbr, 2021-002571lbr. 2021002569lbr.

2021, 02579 and 2021-002570lbr and 2021-at the following addresses. 298 pacific avenue. 358 noe street. 550 bay shore boulevard. 650 4th street. 1635 mission street. 937 coal street. >> staff, are you prepared to make your presentation? >> i wanted to jump in and quickly introduce one of our newer planners who has yet. on item 6d and e of legacy business items this afternoon, our new presenter will be

presenting. they go by all pronouns. ryan joins the department shortly after we went into shelter in place. hired joining the department, ryan graduated with a bachelors in the university of california san diego. welcome, ryan. >> good afternoon, commissioners. katie will burn with three other planners to present seven legacy business applications. following the staff presentations, the members of the public, the representatives will have an opportunity to speak during the public comment. i'll begin with the first application, the old ship saloon, which is the oldest bar still in operation in san francisco and may be one of the oldest on the west coast. established in 1851, the old ship saloon is a 170-year-old

business located at its original address on the corner of pacific avenue and battery street. the saloon began out of a beached ship hull and evolved operations to represent trends throughout time. the business has operated as a saloon, cafe and even brothel, but at the end of it all, the saloon has remained an anchor in the community for nearly two entries. the business address is a category a historic resource because of it's association with the old ship saloon. the business is committed to it's name, historical features and historical records associating with the bar. the planning department request that it be added. the san francisco bay times which was founded by two gay

friends in 1978 as a press publication with the mission to reflect and connect the bay area's diverse community. after 43 years in business, the bay times continues to bring high quality news and design content to readers, specifically throws in the lgbtq ia community. the san francisco bay times is a certified lgbtq owned business and adds coverage on important lgbtq events. not only does the bay times serve its present reader base, but it also acts as an archival resource for future generations. the business is significant and cultural contributions are associated with the production, content and design, which is conducted by staff remotely. therefore, the business is not strongly associated with any physical attachments, but is best represented through it's ongoing publication. the bay times is committed to

preserving its business name, mission and goals and will continue to support its local community through intersectionality and solidarity. the department supports this application and recommends a resolution that the san francisco bay times be added to the legacy business registry. with that, i'll pass it to elton to continue staff recommendations -- presentations. >> hello. planning staff. the next legacy business application we have is flowercraft garden store. a family owned garden store founded in 1974, located in the bayview neighborhood at 550 bay shore. they sell a large variety of plants, trees, soil and related hardware. phillip learner, the owner of flowercraft transformed from a car wash station to a place

where greenery in a predominantly commercial corridor. their motto is we sell happiness. flowercraft wants people to experience the joys of planting and growing ornamental and edible plants. in addition to having a large palate of plants and related hardware, flowercraft believes in educating the community on topics they have -- that they have experienced to allow the customers to make the best decision. topics include bee keeping, fertilizing, california native plants and many more. flowercraft has provided monetary assistance and funding to multiple fundraising events, community gardens, neighborhood gardens and local schools. some of the specific organizations include city of

dreams, inner faith housing development corporation, n.c.h. community garden, work top school, urban wildlife rescue and more. staff and resolution recommend flowercraft to the business legacy registry. the next presenter is ryan. >> hello. planning staff. the fourth legacy business application we have is for fanta, a local family cleaners that has provided dry cleaning and alteration services to the san francisco community for a minimum of 32 years. it's owned by the yee park family. it was bought in 1990 after they immigrated from south korea. it's managed by his daughter young park. they have two locations, one on 4th street and another on baker

street. fanta cleaners also serves hotels as well as commuters who work in san francisco. the business' future is to be included their logo, mascot and green motif found outside the baker street location and 4th street location. staff recommends a resolution to add fanta cleaners inc. to the registry business. the fifth application is for lyon-martin community health services. the 42-year-old nonprofit clinic with specific focus on lgbtq women. regardless of their ability to pay. the nonprofit clinic is --

lyon-martin is committed to a care, dedicated to hiring staff that reflect the community they serve. this includes the lyon-martin leadership team. lyon-martin work has become recognized on the local, state and national level. their leadership is not only in numerous articles written about them, but also in their policy work. notable accomplishments is the first clinic to obtain medi-cal coverage on a number of gender affirming surgeries. they have one location on mission street. lyon-martin is looking to move to a new location in the compton transgender cultural district and the tenderloin district. we recommend approval of the landmark designation of the house, the home base of the pioneering lesbian couple for which the clinic was originally

named to the board of supervisors in february of this year. the office of supervisor mandelman is working on the next steps. including scheduling hearings of the land, use and transportation committee and full boards to act on landmarking. staff supports this application and resolution to add them to the registry. >> good afternoon, commissioners. department staff. presenting two legacy business cases to you today. the sixth legacy business application is for finnegan's wake. a 45-year-old neighborhood bar located at 937 cole street. it was founded in 1976. the current location was previously known as maude's, which was san francisco's

longest running lesbian bar, owned by vicki striker, one of the city's most important women. they hosted the maude reunion for eight consecutive years during the pride weekend. to back the program and several other charities that provide services to underserved communities. the bar is committed to retaining the iconic exterior and interior features which have been unchanged since the day of maude, including the wood over the bar, the plaque celebrating its 50-year anniversary, the original sign that is stored inside and the mural in the backyard. 937 cole street has been identified as significant under the historic context statement for lgbtq history in san francisco for its association with maude. it also has category 8 status

due to the property location within the cole valley district. staff supports this application and supports adding finnegans wake to the legacy business registry. located at 4115 19th street, yankee clipboard travel provides excellent customer service. it has well traveled staff whose wide range of experience provides patrons with a safe travel experience. the agency represents a number of lgbtq crews and providers and is a proud member of the signature travel. the agency is a member of the castro merchant association and the castro valley association. they contribute to the aids for

the annual fundraising event. 4115 19th has historic status. the property has also been identified for its classic revival style of architecture in the context statement. the department strongly supports this application and recommendation the addition of yankee clipper travel to the registry. this concludes the staff presentation and we're available to answer questions. thank you. >> president matsuda: thank you. do any of the commissioners have questions for the staff? we're ready to receive public comment. >> great. thank you. i would like to read one correction into the record in listing the applications, i missed case number

2021-002581lbr. i would like to acknowledge that for the record. now we will open this item up for public comment. members of the public, now is your time to speak about these items. to raise your hand, press star and then 3. once it is your turn to speak, you'll be prompted that your line has been unmuted. each speaker has three minutes to speak. caller, you're able to speak. please start public comment. >> yes, hi, can you hear me? >> yes. >> okay. great.

good afternoon. i am a former san francisco resident. i'm a friend of a lyon-martin patient. that is the 1735 mission street address. she has told me many times how crucial lyon-martin is and was to her health and safety. they were a pioneer for lgbtq rights and we must push forward as leaders until everyone is free and safe. the pandemic has underscored the inequities between the have and have-nots who are pressed -- in oppressed communities. suffer from inequity and lack of human rights, like health care, the trans-community and black trans-women. this global health system -- [indiscernible] is a tremendous -- opportunity to be on the right side of --

[indiscernible] urgency. legacy business and join -- and everything that may be considered that is with the political will to preserve, protect lyon-martin so our fellow humans and community members who are essential to the culture and well-being of san francisco can thrive. thank you. >> hello. thank you. my name is dan. i'm the owner of finnegan's wake, 937 cole, applicant for legacy business status. i wanted to appear today to thank you for the consideration of our business. i wanted to know if anyone had any questions about our application before i made a few comments? >> we don't do question-and-answer here, but

please go ahead and we'll follow up if anything comes up later. thank you. >> well, the presenter did a great job talking about the history of the bar. i am an owner that joined on with the original owner. i joined on in 2014. i'm also from st. louis, missouri, but moved to the city 22 years ago and met tom here. turns out when tom was in the high school, he dated my second cousin, so it was a funny coincidence. then he and i became partners and i'm honored to carry the legacy of an amazing business. not only is it the site of one of san francisco's first and longest running lesbian bars, maude, we've been now the main watering hole in cole valley since 1989. the bar was founded in 76 and moved in 89 when tom took over,

i guess, from where vicki striker left off with maude. it's an important piece of the neighborhood. we are dedicated to the city of san francisco and we're dedicated to neighborhoods as a place for people to gather to share their stories of many generations, sexual preference, background. it is an absolute welcoming open bar for all. we're committed to and focused on. i wanted to make those few comments about the bar. just to let you know that we appreciate your time and consideration. >> my name is john luis. thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of the san francisco bay times. my husband stuart and i moved to

san francisco 35 years ago. we were new to the city. and its lgbtq community and we quickly became readers of the bay times. the newspaper already seemed like a community institution, even though we know it was eight years old at the time. for decades, we've turned to the bay times for commentary, news, arts and entertainment, and just to know what is going on with the community. on february 12, 2004, stuart and my life changed forever when we shared up for a marriage equality rally on the steps of city hall. we became one of the first 10 same-sex couples to be married. we were in the historic lawsuit that won the freedom to be married in california and we've been advocates ever since. several years ago we were humbled when betty sullivan, the new publishers of the bay times asked us to write a regular

column for the paper. after decades of turning to the bay times for news and information, the bay times was turning to us. they valued our voice as one of diversity of the lgbtq voices. we've been writing a regular column for the bay times ever since. for years, we pick up the bay "times" from a metal news box in the castro or other part of the city. the newspaper is still available in hard copy, but the reach of the bay times has expanded to a worldwide audience with online presence. we heard representatives of the government of taiwan reached out to as they had read our column in the san francisco bay "times". we also know firsthand the bay times innovative produced in collaboration with castro

businesses. that streamed them live to the world, served as a lifeline to lgbtq people overseas to seek a connection to san francisco from the isolation they feel at home. when betty and jen reached out years ago, they told us the paper strived for one thing. that was excellence. we belief the bay times -- we believe the bay times meets and exceeds that goal. over 43 years, from 1978 to today, 2021, created an invaluable historic record of san francisco and its lgbtq ai. it's a legend in its own time. thank you very much.

>> [indiscernible] >> caller, it's your turn to speak. >> yes, thank you. this is andrea shorter. i have the pleasure of being a columnist for the san francisco bay times and i just want to echo the comments previous to mine. and just what a gem and what an institution that we all greatly appreciate in the bay times. not only for the lgbtq community, but for our very diverse lgbt community and for san francisco bay area. it is by far, one of the greater forms in which people are able

to connect, learn about what is happening in the community. be able to share in good times and bad times what is happening in our community. but more than anything else, i think really be able to represent the diversity and the fullness of our community, our various points of thought and perspective. as well as celebrating all these things that make the lgbt community and the san francisco bay area community great. i'm very pleased to see this happening by the historic preservation commission to acknowledge and once and for all, as is merited and deserved, to make sure that the san

francisco bay "times" is amongst our legacy businesses. >> lyon-martin has been for over 40 years being a clinic that has been way more than just a medical clinic, but basically, it's like a culture and a part of lgbtq2ia culture in san francisco. so i don't know what more is needed to be a legacy business. i imagine that lyon-martin has already way more than eligible. but it has in the past 10 years since i've been a patient there,

been under threat of closure several times. and lyon-martin needs more support financially and more advocacy on the city level and you know, more secure building to operate out of possibly. yeah, i'm sure it's way more than eligible to be a legacy business. it should be awarded with all that and more. so, thanks for listening. >> thank you. are there any other members of the public that wish to make public comment? >> commissioners? hello, planning staff. so, the business owner for flowercraft is currently having technical issues logging in. they did e-mail me their statement. can i read it in for -- no?

>> how long is it? >> it is -- >> is this from mr. learner? >> this is from their general manager lydia. >> okay. >> it's around like four paragraphs. is that all right? >> why don't you go ahead? >> so this is behalf of lydia. good afternoon, i'm lydia. general manager of flowercraft garden center. here with my associate har len. first, we would like to extend thanks to richard and lou for their support and helpful suggestions on our application, as well as supervisor >> supervisor ronen:en and their

-- hillary ronen and paul marsh for their letter of recommendation. in the mid 70s, our founder had a vision of turning the then defunct car wash into a garden center. longest standing independent owned garden center that has remained in the same location since 1974. we are truly original as we -- as we have maintained the original structure of the car wash along with the 20-foot sign that greets you while driving along bay shore boulevard since our inception. this year, we celebrate our 47th year of operation. flowercraft is peaceful, pleasant with an almost zen-like

am by yawns. we have strong personal relationships with our customers. coming into flowercraft is like coming into a smalltown family owned business in the heart of the city. customers enjoy coming in and visiting with staff and have a leisure shopping experience with a truly lovely and peaceful setting. let's live up to the motto we sell happiness. we are thrilled to be under consideration for this distinction an hope you give

flowercraft with a longstanding commit to the -- commitment to the community. thank you for time and consideration. >> great. thank you for reading that into the record. >> thank you. >> are there any other members of public that wish to make public comment? seeing none, public comment is now closed. the matter is now before you, commissioners. >> any commissioners wish to make any kind of comment? commissioner johns. >> commissioner johns: thank you very much. well, you know, again, we have a really interesting and diverse group of businesses here. some of which i didn't know existed and i'm very happy that i learned about them. i just would to comment on the three that i do know.

one is the old ship, but i knew it as the battery when i had an office at 60 green street many years ago. but i have been back and over the years i've continued to enjoy it every time i've gone in. and then finnegans wake, that's another one that when i'm that part of the city, i've enjoyed over years. i used to go by it on the car when i lived on fifth avenue. now, i don't want you to think that all i do is go around town drinking, so i do want to put in a word for flowercraft. [laughter] because i have been there and they helped me with my garden over the years. so i just think that all these businesses are wonderful and

while i'm talking, i move that they all be added to the legacy business registry. >> president matsuda: thank you. i'm sure that all of the commissioners would support that. but i want to let everyone make their comments. commissioner? >> commissioner nageswaran: hello, commissioners, hello, public, planners. i was so interested in reading all of these descriptions. you know, the old ship bar. i mean, unbelievable long history there. and the other businesses do speak to the variety of businesses we have in the city. and how they kind of make the fabric. i really am enjoying seeing all of this and listening to all of the depth of where people came from, why they did these things,

now, who dated whose cousin. all of that is just fun. i was intrigued with the bay "times", because it's gone virtual. and i thought, wow, you know, i hadn't ever thought of something that was like virtual. it has a huge cultural significance to san francisco. that to me is so fascinating. i think a lot of underserved communities and communities that don't have as much of a voice to really learn from this example. and i'm very happy to hear about it. and i think that, you know, it's a great venue for getting the word out and you know connecting people.

and you know, in the early stages of the gay movement, how much it was like a central focus of what people needed. and making the community a safe place. i commend that. that's all. >> commissioner pearlman: i am impressed with how our history gets intertwined from hearing to hearing as we hear about the legacy businesses. the old ship saloon, we were talking last time about the pharmacy in the district and how someone who was born in 1851 could have been, you know, a patron there. and here we have a business that

was born in 1851. and that remarkableness of the myth of san francisco that is -- it's a mythology out there, but it's grounded in businesses like this one. and that, to me, is just the pleasure as commissioner nageswaran just said. the pleasure of learning about these businesses, the people that made them. this is an aside, but we got a letter from the great-great-great-great grandson of the person who built the ship cottage. so that kind of legacy, you know, that kind of fabric that ties us all together is the amazing thing about this array of distinct and different types of businesses that are the fabric of san francisco. i also just wanted to comment

about "bay times", the "bay times". i came to san francisco in the late 80s. i was working within the aids community, volunteering and working for different agencies. and you know, the "bay times" was so critical. every week. i mean, sadly, the obituaries when it went from a few to a page to two pages, i remember the issue when there were no obituaries in the later 90s. it was the instrument for us to know what was happening in the community. i think that the point about how we operate in the 21st century, you know, 50 years from now it will be interesting to know how many of the legacy businesses are virtual. you know and don't have a specific home, but still make up

the culture and the fabric of san francisco. so, again, i think these are all incredible businesses, incredible commitment to the people who make them. and so those businesses and those communities. so a big thank you to all of them. thanks. >> president matsuda: thank you. commissioner so? >> commissioner so: this is amazing. i would like to -- i love all of them, so i am seconding commissioner johns' motion to approve them all. but i'd like to give a shoutout on three that i really personally feel really connected to. first, "bay times". it's always good to have a local representation of local community-based journalism and we're dwindling in those avenues. continue to exist. virtual is the new power. it's kind of reached farther

audience than it ever could be. so thank you for all your journalistic. i'm glad you're here giving voice to our community to read and learn. i would also like this say, i'm happy to see flowercraft here. lydia to lydia, right. >> thank you for reading the message from lydia, but this is -- i don't know if you recognize me and my daughter, but this is where i buy all my plants from you all these years. and your people are so welcome and nice to help me and my daughter literally hoist how many gallons of dirt in my car? it's nice to be in a community. you're across the street from

the retail chain, but i decided to buy plants and dirt from you to support local businesses. i would love to see you continue to there for many more generations. another 50 more years or 100. and then the old ship saloon, it's like all my friends like to hang out there. like to see basketball games and have cocktail drinks. it's in a location that is so convenient. everyone can hop in, get there and catch up with friends and meet more people. i'm aware you're doing other things with the san francisco heritage, too. so this is a great learning experience to also expand history to san francisco and other people who knew where to go see a basketball game and get a nice glass of beer or cocktail. but also more stories to tell. i love the building in general.

it creates a nice reference in the neighborhood that is changing rapidly and fast. so thank you for being here today. and please i am all yes for all of them. >> president matsuda: thank you. commissioner foley? >> commissioner foley: you know, i just want to reiterate what the other commissioners said. i believe three of the commissioners also said the fabric of the community. so many businesses have gone out of business in the past 14, 16 months because of covid. and it's stunning that all of you have been around as long as you have been and you still made it through covid. i'm just -- i feel blessed to be here with all of you and listen to your stories. and be -- the last thing i would like to say, i'm going to make my continued pitch for qr codes for the businesses so everyone can understand when they go and look at the retail chain, then look at flowercraft and they

click on the flowercraft story and see they're around forever. we should shop with you, and support your local business. thank you for being there. that's my public comment. thank you very much. >> president matsuda: thank you. >> commissioner black: yeah, thank you. it is -- this is my favorite part of every hearing, it's always such a positive noncontroversial moment. i want to thank heritage and the small business association and staff working hard with the applicants to make sure this continues, especially during tough times. first i want to say there are unusual circumstances here. one is that the "bay times" shows you don't have to have a fixed address to be a legacy business. it's city serving and we learned that it's world serving, so hats

off to them. flowercraft. i very recently spent all of last year's gardening budget and this year's gardening budget there. i love their service. the staff are really helpful. the quality of the plants are great. it was an honor to landmark the lyon-martin last month, or take action to landmark. it's an honor on the services, the affirmation surgeries and other services provided. it's a unique service that is really necessary. and that there is a travel agency that has survived the internet over the past 34 years is miraculous. hats off to them. and finally, 170 years for the old ship saloon? that is extraordinary. and that's exactly why the legacy business registration is really important to ensure such

longstanding businesses are able to continue for the benefit of the city. so, thank you, all. >> president matsuda: thank you, all, commissioners. i just wanted to make a few comments of my own. the first one is to ryan. ryan, thank you for the presentation today. we look forward to working with you. and second, and very importantly to all the small businesses that have been willing to stick it out. just for fun, i totalled up the number of years that these businesses represent and it's 413 years. that's a pretty long and deep history. i know because i have worked with some small businesses during this pandemic, how hard it is to stay alive. and how hard it is to keep hope. i really thank you for sticking it out. it's been a very rough year.

not only for profit, but for nonprofit. and for you to continue to move ahead and have a positive outlook to continue to remain a very important part of our community, it's something that is really, really commendable. i also wanted to just reach out and sometimes we forget it takes a lot of work for the businesses to get to us. we have the applicant who provides us with their stories. we have the office of small business, you have to meet with them and patiently meet with each and every one of them to look at the application. then we have our own planning department staff. i want to make sure that all of you are acknowledged and appreciated through this process. and you know, by reading these applications, i think all of us come away with a much deeper understanding. i think a more and deeper sense of pride of knowing that these businesses are in our community, in our san francisco community.

and they all have provided us with such wonderful things. commissioner johns, i was right with you. when you started to talk about where you were going to get your next cocktail, i was right with you. i old ship, i already have now that restrictions are lifting. i already know what i'm picking there. the business times, i know what it's like to want to know more about communities and you have provided that outlet for us to dig deeper, to know what is the most important issues in the community. so thank you for that. flowercraft, i never knew you were related to floor craft. i read through the operation and saw you donated the maple tree that is planted right next to my office. that is growing strong and beautiful. thank you for your donation to

the community at large. fanta cleaners, you know for many immigrant families, this is the first step into the american business world and to be able to survive and to overcome a lot of the prejudices, not just racial prejudices, but prejudices against a lot of immigrants is something that needs to be commended. the lyon-martin clinic, this is a very important nonprofit organization in our community that has continued to provide sensitive needs to their core constituency and we're so lucky to have them. finnegans, bloody mary winner. i am there. and finally, the yankee clipper traffic. to be awarded the signature travel network is a huge deal. i have helped put together many tours to reach this level, it's something that is very hard to get. and so i applaud all of you.

i know we have a motion and a second. so i think we're ready to call for a vote. >> thank you, commissioners, there has been a motion and it has been seconded to adopt a recommendation of approval of legacy business registry applications for items 6a-f. >> commissioner black: yes. >> commissioner foley: yes. >> commissioner johns: yes. >> commissioner nageswaran: yes. >> commissioner pearlman: yes. >> commissioner so: yes. >> president matsuda: yes. so moved, this item passes unanimously. 7-0. this will take us to item 7. case number 2020-004724coa, at 1045 sansome street. this is a request for a certificate of appropriateness. staff, are you prepared to make your presentation?

>> yes, i am. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is michele langley. planning staff. before you is a request for a certificate of appropriateness to make exterior alterations to 1045 sansome street. located on the west side of sansome between green and vallejo streets. designed in a simple style with neo gothic detailing, the building was created in 1926. originally built as a printing facility, it has since been converted for office use. it is a contributor to the northeast landmark district. a proposed scope of work includes the construction of a new roof terrace on the southern portion of the roof, measuring 64 by 45 feet. the proposed roof terrace is set

back five street in the facade and features an open rail. it includes a 6 by 10 vestibule and existing stair penthouse along the far southern portion of the roof deck, with finishes and colors to match the existing stairs. lastly, minor exterior modifications adjacent to the roof are proposed. this work is limited to new exterior light fixtures and an exit door. staff finds that the proposed work will be in conformance with the requirements of article 10. the waterfront special use district number 3. and the secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation. specifically, that the architecture of the building will be maintained and the visible roof modifications will not affect the building's overall appearance or have significant impact on the appearance of the sansome street

facade. they are the distinct feature of the district. additionally, the project has a low profile and maintains the view corridor along the public streets. it would be not be impactful to view corridors, complying with the special use district number 3. staff's preliminary recommendation for the project is for approval. comments were received from the telegraph neighborhood organization. the project sponsor subsequently met with the group to address concerns regarding the use of the proposed roof terrace. a notice of special restrictions regarding the use of the terrace will be recorded in advance of permit approval to memorialize the agreement. this concludes my presentation unless there are any questions.

the project sponsor also has a brief presentation of the project. thank you. >> thank you. project sponsor, you have five minutes. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. tara sullivan. here on behalf of the project sponsor. as michele mentioned the project before you is for 1045 sansome street in the northeast waterfront district. the building occupies the entirety of the block and is three stories in height. the proposal to construct a roof deck at the southern portion of the roof would be 64 feet by 45 feet deep. it will be set back five feet from samson street and -- sansome street and feature a 40 inch railing. as the case report details, the project will not remove any

significant materials or features that characterize the building or historic district. and is compliant with the secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation. i urge you to approve the proposed deck. i wanted to note that the owners of the building have been in extensive conversations with the telegraph dwellers from the outset. it will continue to be used only by office tenants of the building and is meant to be limited in operational hours and use. there were operational concerns of the deck regarding hours of operation, noise levels, lighting and overall use. parameters regarding these issues have been established. further, the onliers will have -- owners will have a community liaison. the owners have agreed to a set of operational conditions that

have been incorporated into a notice of special restrictions that will be recorded on the property. this will be included in the building permit that is associated with the c.f.a. for the project once approved by the project. after discussions of planning staff, it folks on operational issues outside of the commission's purview and it is the permit that allows the construction of the project to be approved. i want to assure the commission that the owners are committed to being a good neighbor and will adhere to these conditions. the t.h.c. supports the project and you should have received a letter or e-mail expressing support. i'm happy to go through each condition if you like. but otherwise i'm here for questions and respectfully ask for approval of the plans proposed. apologies if there is an echo. >> thank you.

this now brings us to public comment. members of the public, now is your opportunity to speak on this item. if you wish to do so, please unmute yourself by pressing star and then 3. you will be prompted when it is your turn to speak. limited to three minutes. seeing no public comment, public comment is now closed and the matter is now before you. >> president matsuda: would any of the commissioners like to provide any comment? commissioner pearlman? >> commissioner pearlman: yes. i just want to say that i thought this was a very sensitively done project. i would endorse it and to have t.h.d. approval and agreement

from the owner, i think speaks very well of the relationship that happened during design of the project. so i move to approve -- are there any conditions -- approve with -- sorry, i'm looking at my agenda. just approve, no conditions. motion to approve. thanks. >> president matsuda: thank you. commissioner nageswaran. >> commissioner nageswaran: my only would be, i didn't -- maybe i missed it, i didn't see any information on what the lighting is and where it's going to be placed on this building. if there is any lighting. i don't know if that will affect anything exterior, views or anything like that. so, that would be one question. i think, you know, they've done well to set back the railings. and you know, keep it as a low profile, but i think lighting

would be the thing that i would most concerned with. so if anyone can answer that question, that would be helpful. >> can we have staff answer that question? >> yes. the lighting is limited to light fixtures on the 4th floor facade where the door to the roof deck is. and i believe all of the associated lighting is along the perimeter, but it's limited to down lighting as to not affect the surrounding neighborhoods. i believe that's one of the conditions listed in the n.s.r. as well. so that's been discussed between the owners and telegraph hill dwellers. >> does that answer your question, commissioner? >> commissioner nageswaran: yes, thank you, i appreciate that.

>> commissioner so: i have really no question about the project, i just wanted to acknowledge that the good example of a very comprehensive investigation and design thoughtfully and also worked with michele, our staff, to come up with such a really thorough materials and visual aid to accurately depict what is the proposed addition is going to look like. and it's very skillfully done. i agree with commissioner pearlman's comment that this is a really well done and thought-through project. also, with a very in-depth community outreach with the telegraph dwellers. i would second the motion. really good work, michele.

and whoever else that worked with you to come up with this report. i really appreciate it. >> president matsuda: i, too, really appreciate this report. and i really am happy to see the utilization of the notice of special restricts. i think it -- restrictions. it helps to incorporate community concerns and comments. i think this is a great tool, even though it's out of our purview to comment, i believe this tool is something that maybe can be utilized by other community groups that have certain concerns about buildings that may have a change of use, or any kind of change in their area. and maybe it's something that we can keep in the planning department's toolbox to educate other communities of the possible use of this kind of mechanism. so i know there is a motion and i know there is a second. so, laura, we're ready to call the vote.

>> commissioners, it looks like there is a motion and it has been seconded to approve the certificate of appropriateness. commissioner black? >> commissioner black: yes. >> commissioner foley: yes. >> commissioner johns: yes. >> commissioner nageswaran: yes. >> commissioner pearlman: yes. >> commissioner so: yes. >> president matsuda: yes. so moved. that item passes unanimously. that takes us to item 8, case number, 2020-009076cao. this is a request for a sert of appropriateness. staff, are you prepared to make your presentation? >> yes, thank you. good afternoon.

can you see my screen? >> yes. >> good afternoon, commissioners. alex west hoff department staff. the request for you is request for certificate of appropriateness for 900 innes. the property is planning code article 10 individual landmark number 250 and located in a public zoning district. the cottage was constructed circa 1875 as a don't of the india basin ship builders and remains as one of the oldest structures with this association. modest sighs vernacular residence is a gabled roof, ship lap siding, front facade decorative features. bracketed window sills and upper

transome. the project is outlined in the report includes the rehabilitation of the cottage to serve as a welcome center with a cafe for the new india basin shoreline park. repair and restoration is proposed for character-defining feature, including the transome window, wood trim and siding. the doors meeting accessibility requirements will be added to the first door in the area of a non-removed addition. to the basement, where an existing non-historic door and window will be removed. interior work includes the removal of interior partition walls. staff have determined that the proposed work will be in compliance with article 10 of the planning code and the secretary of the interior standards. and that the proposal respects the property's significance, repairs or replaces character-defining features,

removes non-historic features and does not increase the footprint. staff therefore recommends approval with conditions. the department has received numerous comment letters on this project from local community members. and neighborhood groups, all of which have been forwarded to the commissioners. several the comment letters have stated that rather than a cafe be included on the main floor, they would rather see the space devoted to historical elements on the sites. the project sponsor team is in attendance and will make a short presentation. first i'll pass it on to recreation and parks department staff member stacy bradley followed by sarah of page and turnbull. thank you. >> thanks. thank you, commissioners for the opportunity to present on this really important project. my name is stacy bradley. i work for the rec and park

department. i'm joined by the architect of record. thanks as well to alex. their partnership along the way. and a really big thank you to our community partners who encouraged the city and the department to purchase this property and who worked on land marketing the ship right cottage. you'll hear about the design and we look forward to working with the staff and community on the program. i'm available for questions as well at the end. off to sara. thank you so much. >> thank you. can you hear me okay? >> yes. >> great. good afternoon, commissioners. i'm representing page and turnbull, the design team for the rehabilitation of the cottage. the proposed project as alex said will rehabilitate the cottage to serve as a welcome center for the india basin

shoreline park. following the ship right cottage designation in 2008, a great deal of research has been focused on how to rehabilitate it. since 2014, we've prepared numerous reports including a feasibility study, a historic analysis for the eir, and historic preservation plan. we are now in the preservation project for the design team as rehabilitation treatment of the cottage. ship wright cottage has been altered throughout history. the insertion of non-historic openings and non-historic addition on the northern facade.

these significant diagrams illustrate the historic fabric in orange and non-historic fabric in blue. on the primary facade, the proposed rehabilitation will restore the appearance of the cottage during the period of significance. the project will retain and repair the character-defining features, missing features such as the barge board will be restored based on physical and documentary evidence. on the south facade, the historic windows will be resword and a new window will be added further back from the primary facade to introduce more natural light to the interior of the cottage to serve the new use.

the basement level will be excavated to install a new code compliant foundation and provide ceiling heights for the multipurpose space while maintaining the historic elevation of the first floor. a wood frame store front window and door system will provide light and access to this space from the park. non-historic door openings will be infilled. as there is no documentary evidence for the historic appearance of the window sash on the rear elevation, the trim will be repaired and the existing non-historic sash will be replaced with single fixed lights. collapsed portions will be reconstructed with the appropriate brick and mortar. next slide. on the north facade, the non-historic bathroom addition will be removed and the new door and sidelight will be installed

to sustain egress and accessible entry. the historic window will be retained and restored. and the sash will be repaired and use as the basis for the other sash on the cottage. they will be retained and repaired on all elevations. siding will be covered by the new grade. salvaged with the replacement of siding that is in poor condition. load will match the existing in-kind. to accommodate the new use and associated code requirements, while respecting the historic footprint of the cottage, interior walls and stair will be removed. seismic rendering will occur from the interior to preserve the finishes. the design of the finishes will

balance sensitivity to and preservation of the historic character of the cottage with the needs of a new public use. many years of working on the building and history, we have great respect and appreciation for the significance of the story to the india basin community and san francisco. this rehabilitation will preserve the artifact to the era of the schooner while opening it up to the community. thank you for your time and consideration. >> members of the public, now is your opportunity to speak on the item. if you wish to do so, press star and 3 and you will be prompted when it is your turn to speak. each speaker is limited to three minutes.

>> good afternoon. my name is shirley. i'm a native third generation san franciscan. i've lived in the india basin neighborhood for the past 11 years. many factors drew me to the neighborhood. one of them was the incredible history of the area. especially that of the maritime industry. i believe its legacy should be preserved for future generations in the use of the ship wright cottage located at 900 innes avenue. its very name invokes images of boat-building. a ship wright is someone skilled in ship construction and repair. a few years ago, the ship wright was landmarked as a historic building, attribute to the thriving industry that once flourished here. this property was home to the

wooden boat industry and in particular the scout schooner for over a century. these boats were vital to commerce and built with a labor of highly skilled ship wright. today, we're gathered here to hear people's opinions on the future use of this historic building. i urge you, commissioners, to preserve the history of the site by designating the cottage as a place where current and future generations can learn about the incredible history of the india basin boat-building industry. any other use will reduce this rich history -- excuse me will render this rich history lost or at least diminished. please do not allow this history to lapse into a state of insignificance to the neighborhood.

>> i serve as the executive director for api. it's a community-based organization in bayview hunters point and our office is located just blocks away from 900 innes, the india basin shoreline park and cottage. we've been working with rec and park and build for many years on the larger park development project. but most importantly, we have been directly working with community to amplify voices of bayview. and for the first time in bayview, we have an opportunity to not only build a park for the existing community, but build one through a lens of equity being top priority in every aspect of the project. allowing us to really address some of the historic legacy of disenfranchisement in bayview.

i am here in full support of the certificate of appropriateness for the shipwright cottage. we do feel that this historic space will provide a welcoming center that attracts park-goers, but also educates about the rich history you're hearing about around the boat-building industry. there is intent for the project to make sure that is included on site. because we've heard from many community members how valuable that is. so as we continue to develop an equitiable development plan for the park space, we encourage you to continue your support and approval of this location. and interest in the entire project. thank you.

>> hi. i'm bay area director with public plan. and i'm also here to speak in support of this certificate of appropriateness for the shipwright cottage of india basin. this public land has a 50-year-old partnership with the city of san francisco. we're proud to have been working with the department, with apr i., and the park reliance bayview hunters point since 2015 on this project. this process, community voices have been amplified through a robust design process reflecting the rich history of the neighborhoods while ensuring the

project benefits the neighborhood through development and community health. this represents a down payment on the continued need to invest in parks and open space. that are directly tied to the well-being of the bayview hunters point. this community has faced decades of inequities and we are hopeful this project is moving forward. the shipwright cottage is a historic structure for the community. and the city. and would provide opportunity for the community to engage and showcase their proud and rich history associated with the site. we believe the project partners have worked and we continue to work very thoughtfully with the planning department to ensure that the structure is preserved

and enhanced as a great welcome center for the community to the park. so, again, i'm in full support of the certificate of appropriateness and thank you for your time. >> good afternoon. can you hear me? >> yes. >> yes, i'm a native restaurant of bayview hunters point. resident. i'm familiar with the building 900 which is trying to get to be an art place to exhibit the history of our community to let the young people in our community and the visitors to our community know the history of our community. and that was the first ship building before the shipyard. i think things like that should be talk taught to the young

people and people coming into the community. the important history of our community and how the people in this community made this city a better city. i ask you, being part of the india basin advisory committee to support this project. i thank each and every one of you for serving on this commission. thank you very much. >> hello. my name is jill fox. i'm speaking personally. you also have in your packet a letter from the india basin. i moved to innes avenue in 1992 when the historic boat yard was still a working boat yard. in 1999 this dream park around

india basin had been advocating for it ever since. i was part of the group that got the landmark 250 and the 900 innes land acquired for park. needless to say, i am thrilled to see the cottage restored. but i think a few tweaks are in order. before approving the restoration of the shipwright cottage, i would appreciate the historic preservation commission discussing these four adjustments. one is to designate a space devoted to the human and environmental history of india basin. with displays to honor and learn from the people who lived and worked here before us. second to restore the water tower that you saw in some of the photographs to serve as a water reclamation barrel, to water the gardens and show

current visitors how people survived here before municipal water systems. it could also serve as an iconic welcome sign to the park. the water tower was removed illegally by a previous owner. three. i'd like to see appropriate wood siding and historic-style signage in and on the cottage and on the replaced outbuilding to respect the period style of the cottage. and to give the park the appropriate look and feel of the cottage. and finally, we want to restrict -- i'd like to see commercialization within the landmark and the park restricted. plans for the cottage and historic boat yard show three commercial businesses in these 1.5 acres, including a cafe in the cottage. commercial space in a public park is not needed because

220,000 square feet of new commercial space has been approved within half a mile of 900 innes. that much space can certainly accommodate the city's equity goals. the cottage and historic boat yard sit on unique waterfront land that was acquired as public recreation and open space. not city subsidized business space that will compete with the small businesses that exist here now, or will be here in the near future. people should not have to maneuver around cafe table and chairs in order to learn local history or enjoy a park. i'd appreciate your consideration on this and i do look forward -- [bell ringing] -- to a beautiful restored historic cottage across from my home. thank you. >> last call for public comment. if you wish to speak on the item, press star and then 3.

we have one more public comment. >> yes, good afternoon. my name is dan dote. good afternoon, commissioners. i'm director of the bayview historical society. in 2007 we commissioned the india basin survey. this document provides material referenced by all the subsequent studies on the park, turnbull, anchor building and so on. we've also supported a longtime efforts by india basin residents for improving the area and the land marking of the building and we recognize their work in engaging others to appreciate this rare and under-appreciated area of the city. we fully support the exterior

and ada improvements to comply. so we really applaud this work. but we would add that the historic -- essentially a maritime museum is an appropriate use for the interior of this space. a cafe really does not fulfill the requirement in the area. we look forward to the work going on. we think it's terrific design. but we do encourage you and urge you to see the welcome center as a living history museum. so thank you very much for your consideration. >> good afternoon. my name is michael hammond. i'm a long-term resident of the neighborhood. and i've been involved in the creation of this landmark and its evolution to this point. it's a wonderful design they've

come up with, however, india basin was the center of the wooden boat building area that was crucial to the area. the schooner was the mack truck of its day and they were built here in india basin. today, there are important remnants of that industry remaining, however the rec and park plan for the 900 innes park removes all vestiges of the body yard save this landmark cottage. it is, therefore, crucial that this building tell the story to ourselves and future generations. the plans before you today contemplate the complete rebuilding of and a repurposing of the cottage. the ground floor is to be a community facility. and the main floor a food service area. a cafe. nowhere is there space that indicates what went on here.

the historic preservation committee, the bayview merchants and many others seek to rectify that short coming by using the main floor of the cottage, the welcome center, as a history room. a place where the story of the india basin boat-building industry can be told. the people who work here and the products they built. photographs, diagrams, documents and dioramas so that people today and into the future will be able to understand and experience what happened here. the proposed use of this precious space is wrong for a number of reasons. the cottage was not landmarked because of some famous architectural design. rather because of what happened here. the intent of the landmark must be respected. the intent was and is for this building to tell future generations about the boat-building at india basin.

to convert it to a cafe obliterates that history and insults the status of this landmark. this is the last remaining evidence of the schooner industry and wooden boats that fueled the bay area commerce for over 100 years. they're going to destroy all the features of the boat yard except the cottage. it is, thus, the last opportunity to tell the story to of what went on here. there is a thriving cafe next door. there is going to be 220,000 square feet of commercial space that is right next door to this park. much of it will be built and operational before the park can be opened. [bell ringing] such a space is also required by the eir for this park.

mitigation number measure mcr -- >> thank you. that concludes your time. >> okay. >> the mitigation measure, mcr1c requires -- >> thank you. okay. commissioners, that concludes public comment. public comment is now closed. and the matter is now before you. >> thank you. are there any commissioners who would like to make comment? >> commissioner pearlman: yes, thank you. i, too, have similar concerns and i don't know what our role would be -- let me back up. overall, i think the project is excellent and certainly endorse the c of a being granted on this project. there is much to like about it. i had a similar kind of gut reaction immediately when i looked at the plans and saw a cafe there. i thought the story is so

interesting. i mean it's a fascinating piece of san francisco history. and certainly i would think interesting to many, many, many people and a good way to get people to come to this area both locals and visitors to san francisco. so it feels like a big missed opportunity to not have the history presented. i mean it's called a welcome center. i don't usually think of a welcome center as place i get a coke. you know, the welcome center is welcoming me to this park and telling me why i came here. so, again, i don't know what our role is in determining content versus you know granting the c of a relative to the restoration of this building.

but i hope there is, and maybe mr. westhoff could give us insight into that. if we do -- again i know mr. hammond was cut off at the end, but it's sound like the eir there was a reference to presenting the history here. so i don't know what he was about to, you know, talk about before he was cut off. but i would sincerely want to see the history of this place at this location. it seems incredibly appropriate and the right thing to do. >> president matsuda: thank you. mr. westhoff, i'm going to ask you to comment on that after the next two commissioners make their comments and their statements. and maybe while they are doing that, if you can give us further

information about what mr. hammond said about the mitigation measures he mentioned in the public comment. i'm going to move on to commissioner nageswaran. >> commissioner nageswaran: okay. working off of what commissioner pearlman was talking about, there is something to be said about this project based on what we are given from article 10. so article 10, section 104c1 talks about landmarks on public property. i'll read it quick. basically, it says that -- the property included in such -- i'm sorry. i'll summarize. basically, it says that the

interior of landmark on public property is subject to review. and this one is landmark 250. it was constructed in 1875 by derks. and i keep seeing in the case report the year 1920. i don't know where that comes from. that is one question i have. part of what we're given is to do -- to look at the maintenance of character-defining features. i saw it in several places, including the page and turnbull report and i see one from the kelly plank report that one of the interior -- the interior layout and partitions are part of the character-defining features of the property. so when we are looking at this property, we are also going to look at the interior. this is something that i feel is

you know, is just baseline of what we have to go off of. we have this structure from 1875. rare, rare in fact. and also on the shipyard, rare, rare. so we really need to look at [indiscernible] -- you know, this is a landmark, it's not just a historic resource. and so we need to kind of go that direction and say, okay, what can we do? looking at the interior photos, i can tell there were a lot of alterations and things like that. but also, the page and turnbull report, you can easily see that they put that the interior walls, there are a number of significant -- those are considered significant. so i think we need to re-evaluate how we design this interior space based just on that.

and outside of that, we have standard number one that says that your new use should be xabl with the landmark and what the space was originally used for. it was a residential building. it had little rooms that people lived in them. and now we're moving those inardz, you're not fining what was this for. so that -- we're trying to maintain character. so thinks the gist of -- this is the gist of what i'm trying to say here. and reflect on. i really appreciated the thoughts of using it as a museum space. and as far as like exhibitions, we have, in fact, you know, a recommendation to approve with conditions. the conditions are to adopt the

mitigation monitoring program and the historic preservation plan. the historic preservation plan includes in it to respect the interior partitions to the degree that we can. and it also talks about hazardous materials being removed, gentle with that. asphalt shingles on the roof. i would vote with fire-rated wood schinkels. i did that on a barn property recently. and if that was the original intent, that would be great. as far as the windows, i appreciate that the original windows that had multi-light are going to get multi-light again. i would suggest that for the more contemporary openings that they also have more of the delineation. whether that be that they're

differ yated. with the new uses, showing incorporate features that promote what that use was for. and not just say a blank spot where we put a contemporary glass wall. and respect the historic fabric. this is such a small building that when i looked at it, my eye went right to the contemporary features. and i could -- i zoned in on them because of the proportion. because of the lack of delineation. and size of them in comparison with the smaller feature of how historic properties are expressed in human-sized things like siding and trim work and the artistic value of those

things. and you know, the sense that a human made it. when you put a more contemporary feature in there, it look more manufactured and takes away from that. i do appreciate the restoration part of it. i didn't hear anything about what the structural interventions were going to be and how that was going to come in. i didn't hear anything about the mechanical electrical plumbing infrastructure and how that was going to come in. again, these all affect how the building is going to look on the interior as well as the exterior. we have to vet things. what is going to come out of the roof. what is going to be around the property. are we going to see equipment? also, i'm not sure if the stairway and the back deck are part of the shipwright cottage or part of the general plan of this area. but i'd like to see materials that reflect the eclectic

character of what was you know this area. not necessarily like marin county or something that is more contemporary, trying to make it snazzy. you know, i just want it to read more as a cultural resource and not a venue for attraction. and you know, i walked around the site and i saw there were buildings behind the shipwright cottage that i didn't see on the overall site plan. two of them were just downhill toward the water from the shipwright cottage. and two were on the dock. those are also opportunities for exhibition and speaking to the overall history, i happened to talk to someone that mentioned

there was like a chinese contingent of shrimpers that would fish out there before the war effort kind of pushed them out. so there is a lot of interesting cultural history in that area. we really need to incorporate those things so that people really get an appreciation for it. you can't just go there and see it and have any appreciation until you know like what we just all read. so, as far as like the barge board, i like reinstating that. i think siding, having just done a siding project, i know that the boards are brittle. they need to be either kept in place or repaired in place, using epoxy repair. or we need to make sure that the documented carefully so the same sort of siding is put back on.

there needs to be care to maintain character. as much as possible i would like this leave it the way it was originally built. so you asked for it. you got it. there you go [laughter]. thank you. >> president matsuda: thank you. i know that rec and park wants to make clarifying points and i know that they're going to speak to the reference -- but i want to have commissioner black make her comment and then we'll go to rec and park and then the planning department staff. >> thank you. so, this is -- >> commissioner black: this is just a quintessential worker bee building. we're so lucky it survived. i'm uneasy whenever historic buildings become vacant because of the increased danger of fire, vandalism and then the buildings

end up going away, which is a shame. so i'm really pleased to see it being preserved. i want to thank the area residents we heard from who spoke today. who worked really hard to landmark this important neighborhood resource. it takes a neighborhood, not just a village. it takes a neighborhood to do that. sometimes, though, finding an economic use of a property is what is needed for its survival. so i'm not opposed to new uses here. having said that, i strongly agree there should be a really comprehensive historical presentation of the property incorporated into this overall project. as one of the country's. not just san francisco, but as one of the country's port cities, this area for 19th area ship building is so important to san francisco's history. and that history should be represented at this site, not

just by this building, but also by a greater understanding of how the site was used. i see the proposed use as a welcome center, although i'm not really clear on what that is. and a cafe or the multipurpose space below. i don't see those as incompatible with providing a greater history or a part of the greater history presentation of this property. but i think it would have to be carefully done. i'm curious what the mitigation measures state. i look forward to hearing about that. honestly, because this is going to be a park, it's a natural opportunity for rec and parks to include artifacts and information, celebrate the surviving vernacular structure and the site of india basin. so i'm going to be supporting this. i'm not really sure where our

authority lies in terms of what we can require in historical information. perhaps we can write it in a way that staff knows what the commission's opinions are and can work with park and rec to achieve those objectives. anyway, i look forward to hearing what the mitigation measure says. >> thank you. ms. bradley, did you want to make comments? >> yes, i did. thank you so much. very definitely confusion in the interior drawings that we presented. we are not planning on having a cafe within the shipwright cottage. so i'm very -- i apologize those details were in there. it was an earlier iteration we were identifying. that first floor is a welcome center and gallery to do exactly as everybody has been discussing

with the -- celebrate the history of the shipwright cottage and the ship building, the path of the ship building. we anticipate perhaps providing an option of grab and go from a local vendor to help as commissioner black mentioned with the -- you know, the ability to remain open and sustainable, financially sustainable. that may be a component. we're still working out those details. emily, i think it might be best to talk about a little more about where we are with the interior programming. if you would let her have an opportunity. i wanted to make a comment on the wood siding. we're keeping wood siding and sara can talk about that. >> thank you, i'm going to let

ms. speak next and then after that we can hear from another representative of rec and park. just before i ask her to speak, i want to understand that you have communicated with the people, members of the public, who have expressed concern about this cafe that there will not be a cafe proposed. mr. hammond, l. williams of the merchant association, india basin neighborhood have all been informed of this information? >> i'm a little confused about that piece of communication. i'm not positive we've closed the loop on that. so, you know, after the hearing, yes, we will clarify. yes, we will definitely clarify. >> good, thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. planning department staff.

i did want to clarify, yes, there is a mitigation measure that was included in the eir done for the india basin project. which does require a robust interpretation program. and so there are details on that that are included in the packet, but it would be rely upon the -- documentation has been completed for the project which was another mitigation measure that was also video recording that has been done. as noted, we've come up with a salvage plan. so there is much documentation starting with one of the speakers says, reports that was done previously. we've also asked them to include programming that might reach out to the maritime.

>> that was a i adopted for the environmental impact report which was certified. did you want to have somebody from rec and park make further comment. >> yeah, actually. emily from architect. who has been working on the interior. just for the comment on the interpretive program, we're working really closely with the

community. and which is why we haven't yet put forward the interpretive program because we want to incorporate not just the shipwright historic, the broader community and how it's integrated into this area and this project and india basin as a whole. we didn't want to rush. we do have time as we remediate the site and build the park. so it will just take -- so we're just taking our time on to make sure we get it right. and hitting all of the needed components historically and culturally. >> for purposes of this commission hearing, is it fair

to say that the welcome center will be a historic interpretive center that will reflect the history of the ship building industry in san francisco. or well, i -- well beyond the welcome center, is that correct? >> yeah. so we haven't fully programmed it yet. the intention is that it will be both a welcome center and a gallery. that will provide information about the historic resource, the shipwright cottage, the path, the ship building industry. but we haven't -- we haven't gotten far enough along with programming it. we don't know yet the full details of how we'll be doing that. so we do plan on incorporating it into the interpretive program and making sure that it's clear what was -- why the ship might be important. landmark and celebrating that history.

i think for us, it's really important that we have some assurances that's a very big part. >> yeah. >> -- of the process. we might not have the specific details about, you know, what the final product will be because you will be having i'm assuming community charettes to make sure you're reflecting the entire story or the wholistic story of this particular area. and of the ship building industry that the commission can feel assured that there will be the majority of i don't know what percentage of the welcome center will reflect some type of interpretive story about the history of the ship building industry. >> yes. this piece is still under

development. should we come back and present on the -- give you an update either through staff? or at another hearing in the future once we get farther along? >> well, let's -- i have other commissioners who want to make -- probably make comment or ask you a few more questions. so let me ask them to participate. commissioner nageswaran? >> commissioner nageswaran: yeah. i don't want to take up too much time, but i would like to see them come back to talk about the actual program for the building and the interpretive program and what the position is of the cottage within the context of the site rather than focus on the cottage because it's an overall entity and then also materials and lighting. and i'll get the rest to the other commissioners. >> commissioner johns?

>> commissioner johns: i'll start out by saying, president, that it was what? maybe 2010 when we were concerned whether or not a large gust of wind would topple this building to the ground. and it shows how far we've come. and that is really wonderful. but here's the thing. the project that seems to me that we're now discussing after the comments from stacy bradley and alison, this is a project that was presented to the commission. i mean, it just is not the same project at all and this, i find, to be very disquieting. what i would like to do is have

everybody have their say this afternoon and continue this matter until we have presented to us a complete project that we've been told by the community that there has been suggested by the community that there hasn't been a whole lot of communication with the sponsors of the project. but we've heard from the sponsors of the project, oh, yes, we're working on it. well, it can't be both. so, what i would like to see is this thing put on hold as far as what we're doing goes. let the parties communicate. let them figure out what is going to be done with this space. and then come back to us when

there is a complete project that we can evaluate on in -- in an appropriate manner. >> president matsuda: thank you. >> i'd like to know -- i've heard from a couple of commissioners, they'd like more time. i would like to know the rest of the commission and then the proper time, i'd be prepared to move that we continue this. thank you. >> commissioner black: so, i'm happy to continue this item so that people can realistically work out more of the details. what we see is what we get.

>> i really learned today there's a lot of things that we still need to understand and you helped identify and articulatethose things . i am alongside the mission or john's. i think we should let the parks and rec and the community and planning staff work on this little bit more and bring it back to us once it's more fully fleshed out and we have that community supports. i was in the navy. i've spent a lot of time down there. i was not in the navy when this cottage was built but i'm hundred percent supportive of the project and what's happening here but i do think that my recommendation is to make some, that they would go back, do more work and bring it

back to the commission. >> commissioner pullman. >> commissioner pullman: i wanted to thank him about understanding the nature of our roleand i had a couple of comments . one is that it is an incredibly small space and that to meet the needs of today, particularly small rooms with doors that are toonarrow, obviously wouldn't work in a setting like this .i don't have any issue with opening up the space. i'm happy to hear that rpd is looking at historical access and that was part of the eir originally. i also wanted to comment on one of those statements about the replacement windows as being so contemporary. this has always been a challenge for me from an

architects point of view and as a reviewers point of view because i had the same respons instantly . i looked at the elevation and my high went right to the big window, the big basement window there as being completely out of place. i think also in the efforts that rpd is doing to tell us more about the history, i think i really do think there should be a way to create a window that is far more compatible but there is a way to distinguish it as a different kind of window so does meet the interior requirements. but i reallyfind that very jarring . so i agree with that. i also agree that it does need morework. it needs more work on the inside and outside . and i heard from the community

there point of view is very strong and i don't know that the conflict between what rpd is telling us today and what we're hearing from the people who have been sending materials in writing to us about what they didn't see in the package. i also would agree that a continuance is probably up. >> miss bender flight did you want to submit information?>> i wanted toreflect about a potential option . as we spoke about earlier, the interpretive program is a requirement that rpd will have to do and if there requirement when that needs to happen so i wanted to lay out the possibility that if it's a

historical interpretation, that there could be added conditions of approval that the historical interpretationprogram , part of that would be within the supervised cottage and that program could come back to you for review at a later date. i wanted to talk about that as a potential option here. >> chair matsuda: we will have that particular piece come back to us as a later date. >> not to be added to the condition ofapproval but the program's requirements . what we can do is condition it it's a portion of the interpretive program would need to be within thewelcome center and that as that , the content of that program is developed it could come back to the commission forreview . >> chair matsuda: when you talk about portions i think that gets to theinterpretation as well .

>> correct, i guessi'm saying there's requirements right now for an interpretive program of the park . so there's always been the understanding that some portion of that would happen within the cottage so what i'm saying is because the and mrp interpreted mitigation member says it's right more generally, part of the condition of approval for the specificappropriateness , we could call that out in more detail and have a requirement that the full interpretive program would come back so i'm saying that would be one possibility if we were to go forward today. >> chair matsuda: or be continued. >> correct. >> chair matsuda:correct . i think commissioner norris warren did you want to make comments? >> i guess i was veering towards was there another

building where the exhibit could happen? the building below the cottage or the ones near the docks? since this is sort of the only building of itskind , but i do understand the acts is a part of it and i worked on shipyards for many years and noted how all the variety of different buildings but some are more conducive to one use and some are conducive to another use. i noticed on the drawings for the project that it said will retain these features unless they need to be replaced. i'd like to know which features are going to be replaced rather than sort of guessing. thoseare my other comments . >> chair matsuda: i think we answered some of those questions and maybe we should allow a little bit further but

did you want to chime in? i think you're getting the feel of the commission. >> i am, absolutely. i just wanted to chime in that we are, the interpretive program we are working closely on that with the community. not just through the connection with the community but we've also been focused on equitable development plan and so we have a group of communities on supporters and as far as community leaders who are working with us on that piece so that's where we are incorporating the interpretive program and while we do think that we can piece the main components of the interpretive

program will be within the welcome center and the gallery, this bishop is exactlythe right place for the historic interpretive component . we do intend to put this throughout the site as well so it's not going to be limited to just the shipwrights cottage but it will mostly be. the shipwrights cottage will be the main historic interpretive location for the history or the nearest place for it but we will be continuing the information throughout the site as well sothat not just in one location . and i just wanted to encourage everyone that this is a very important project. this piece and the whole project is very important but the department, it is our biggest project we are working on and we are excited to be able to move forward with developing the park and would

definitely welcome coming back with the historic interpretive piece. >> chair matsuda: we thank the parks and rec department for undertaking this and making it apriority projectfor the department . we want to make sure we get it right . we want to make sure we get it right with you and with us and the community because this is something that going to be in the community for many generations to come and you want to make sure the history reflected throughout the whole area is inclusive. i think of all sorts of needs from that area. so i know that commissioner johns has made a suggestion, he hasn't quite made it into a motion. i know that commissioner foley sounded like he would support something that commissioner

johns would want to make into a motion andso i'm going to call on you , commissioner johns unless you are going to make public comments but feel free. >> madam president, you certainly nailed that one . i move that we continue this matter in order to allow rec and part to talk to the community and to resolve some of these issues and so that we can come back to us with a complete presentation which takes into account the questions that commissioner nagaswaran has raised and the issues that commissioner

pearlman raised but to be understood that we anticipate a complete project that has been bought out when it comes back to us. i'm not including in the motion the specific time when we have to come back because i want to make sure that the parties have sufficient opportunity to iron out the details but the motion then is to continue this project or this hearing rather until we can bepresented with a complete project . >> second that motion. >> chair matsuda:commissioner, did you want to make ? >> i wanted to comment on that, i missed my second motion but i would concerned for rpd that there is a significant time

differential between the time it takes to prepare what is the interpretive program, what part of it and up on signage, what parts of it and up in different placesin the park and that could be , could take years because we don't have years to do that. i was more partial to what ms. vanderslice suggested. i still would like it to be continued but for amuch shorter time .like, 2 hearings from now to wrap up the design issues that i brought up and commissioner nagaswaran brought up and in the drawing it does show the specifics that there would be an interpretive center , not cafi there. but i wanted to separate out

the piece of what the interpretation is. just specifying where the interpretationthis play would be to me is fine . but understanding the content and working with thecommunity as we all know , that could take months and years and that would just leave this project hanging for rpd. which we don't want to do. >> chair matsuda: icr attorney is on the call and i was wondering if you could ask the attorney the question of whether we could bifurcate those issues to move one part of the project ahead and still be able to reserve comment about the second part in terms of the interpretation and history and design of that. >> good afternoon commissioner . this is the deputy city attorney. ithink to the extent you would

want todo that , there would be a way to do it . on the other hand this is a field that looks comprehensively as to whether the proposed project, how it would affect the landmark so to the extent they did not landmark the whole interior but some elements of the interior are currently funding so in that sense to the extent some of this interpretiveprogram may be installed in the interior , it may beintrinsically related in such a way it is easier to continue to hold . >> chair matsuda: thank you very much. so there isa motion and i did hear a second . and i see no more comments. >> commissioner pearlman: can i make one more comments?

i'm wondering if we can thread the needle a little bit and just say the identification of historic presentation is in continued, is in the next package rather than any specific about the interpretive material. because i think we should define when we would want rpd to come back. to presentbecause otherwise it's just open-ended . and it just feels like we're really the impediment to letting this project move forward . and i think that satisfies both the city attorney's issue that we are defining what we're seeing these other issues that need to get cleared up but at the same time we're not holding up rpd indefinitely. >> chair matsuda: miss gabby?

>> i wanted to comment on that and commissioner pearlman i appreciate your comments and we are hoping to move forward with the permitting of the properties that we are able to deliver the project as anticipation when construction started in 2022 and the plan as i mentioned earlier to do the interpretive programs, taking our time with that and not rushing so i understand the confusion around the interior plans and i apologize for that. that interpretive program is intended to take a longer time than what we needfor the building department's review . we really want to start construction in 2022 and i know it's less than a year but everything takes so long in our city that we really just want

to make sure that we're able t move forward with this project as quickly as we can >> chair matsuda: thank you . ms. vanderslice. >> i wanted to clarify our other option, that the parts put together an interpretive plan. i know this is sort of a small point but the interpretive plan lays out the general locations and some of the content that will be used but it basically is what we will use to do the initial approval of the interpretive plan with the idea that the whole realm, all the currentinformation for the interpretive program will take that longer amount of time . so i've been coming back with what we call the interpretive plan which lays out in a more general sense what will be required along with location and some ideas that the narrative structure and examples of the photos that will beused . it's something that could happen more quickly whereas the full interpretiveprogram , the

whole layout of all these could happen later and that wouldn't necessarily be needed now if we were to say that the interpretive plan would be enough at this time. >> would you just for purposes of a motion, would it be to approve with conditions and only come back with the interpretive plan or to continue and have them come back when the interpretive pla is available ? >> i think that's up to the commission at this point . there is a discussion about the level of detail we would want now in regards to approving the cna and so i just wanted to lay out there is this interim document that the planning department is already requiring which then leads to further development so if it does get continued and comes back, we

can come back with the interpretive plan and we could at that point condition approval that the whole program could come back when it's developed but that would probably be as mentioned in a year, likely. >> chair matsuda: thank you for clarifying that. commissioner johns. >> commissioner johns: as far as i'm concerned, i didn't intend and wouldn't insist on the full-blown all details pla . just the outlines of the plan, itself would be acceptable i think. the reason that i did not put a date on this is if this is indeed as important a project as rex and mark says it is, then rex and park will spare the horses. it will get this thing organized and get back to us.

normally i have the fullest confidence in the ability of city departments and agencies to do their jobs. but i must say that in this instance, i feel completely let down by the way this project has beenpresented to us today . so as soon as rex and park can get the program organized and flesh out these details, then the sooner rex and park can bring this thing back before the commission. if they can be done in two weeks then i'd be happy to hear it in two weeks. if it takes for, it's for. i'mnot trying to hold this project up . i just want aproper presentation made so we can vote on it .

>> chair matsuda: commissioner johns, if you continue to make the motion to continue the project as described by mister vanderslice has been developed and is ready to be presented to us. >> commissioner johns: yes, and i'd like commissioner nagaswaran and pearlman's questions to be included in the presentation. >> chair matsuda: thank you. commissioner nagaswaran. >> commissioner nageswaran: i think it's smart that rack and park came to us as it is a very sensitive site and now they've got a lot of input and a lot of information that they can move forward and kind of pull this together. i have complete confidence you're going to look at everything and think about it and as far as like the interio partitions go , i know i think in my head a lot so i wanted to

express if there's a way to actually retain partitions and allow accessibility, you could take out the sidewalls and just have partitions that are on the lot and you have a clear pathway along one side of it and then you can turn any which way you want within those spaces. so there are things you can do still maintain sort of the portions of the room that arein the building . and i agree with the other commissioners that are just trying to have a general sense of the layout of the plan. where interpretivematerials are going to be . and not necessarily get into the finery of what you're going to work with the community to resolve in terms of content. but i think it was good for you to come and get all these ideas

and i have a temperature of what to go from. thank you. >> chair matsuda: commissioner foley. >> commissioner foley: they already said everything i was going to say. >> commissioner block: i support coming back with soon with a broader understanding of the project. and then following up later with actual implementation of more specific historical plans that work well for me and i would be prepared to support thatnomination for that motion . >> chair matsuda: commissioner so? >> i agree with my fellow commissioners comment on the

design review, architectural integrity and also the inside out. what i wanted to bring up his project with this magnitude procedurally i would assume or really appreciate if there would be something that is like for information only like a preview of what your coming to propose instead of having this first time we are looking at it be the full-blown public hearing andit would be approved . because case in point, we spent 30 minutes ormore talking about this project . i would challenge or recommend, would it be procedurally better if we take this matter to the design review committee or if you are passing time, you would be more respectful for everybody's time and our community to have an informational review so we can share all these amazing comments that my fellow commissioners had off to the table which i really agree,

specifically on the architectural aspect this should be more consistent with the historic landmark quality. this is something i wanted to add procedurally, how can we do better next time and also i hope that you have also gone through these design review comments with our fellow commissioners and the arts commission. this is a specific complex project and i'd like to also get some perspective on their review comments as well because we are as a city governing agency , we don't work in a silo so i want to make sure that when park and rec as these projects in schedule, just like everybody's project but we should make sure that we are still doing the best strategically in terms of our time.

best use of everybody's time to make sure that we are facilitating your process. i wanted to have this thing buttoned up and we can move to the next agenda item. >> chair matsuda: may i suggest a month continuous and if parks and rec is unable to provide the information we can continue from there. >> commissioner johns, would you besupportive of a motion to continue this recommendation ? >> commissionerjohns: a month would be fine. >> chair matsuda: do i hear a second ? thank you commissioners. there has been a motion to continue the item until may fifth, 2021 and it has been seconded commissioner black .

. commissioner foley. [inaudible] [roll call vote] >> thank you commissioners, thatitem has been continued until may 5 . >> chair matsuda: thank you for listening to our comments and we look forward toseeing you back in a month . getting back to commissioner so's comments, this came before us on as an agendaitem as a certificate of appropriateness . i don't know if rec and park was expecting to have this type of full blown out discussion. i'm glad that we did so i can get abetter understanding .

the certificate looks to what is presented before us but i think because of the public comment we have received, that wasdifferent from what was presented to us , we can continue this conversation so it does not normally happen with this type of agenda item. >> we weresurprised as well. thank you for clarifying . >> thank you. >> this places us on item number nine, 2014.0263, this is a informational presentation on the historical contextstatement readthere is no commission action required . are you ready to present ? >> yes and can you see my screen to mark. >> yes we can.

>> good afternoon commissioners and department staff item before you is an informationalpresentation on san francisco resident parks , 1906 to 1940 . the historic context statement was written historic preservation richard bradley and funded by the historic preservation fund committee . san francisco resident parks 1940presents case studies on the development of eight reckoned parks . westlake park, ingleside terrace, forest hill and forest hill expansion , linton manor and bellevue terrace. historical context statement was developed to provide framework and fund evaluations of historic resources and eight neighborhoods included in the study and to aid department staff inthe identification and evaluation of other residents park neighborhoods . the residence historical context statement documents the history of each neighborhood

between 1906 and 1940 and includes a discussion of the 12 architects, builders and the establishment and design of each community . marketing practices are also discussed including these restrictive deeds and covenants to protect against building and lock modifications and prohibit racial and ethnic minorities and property occupations. the city identifies the special style of building and landscape pictures and historical context statement includes areas of significance andprovides recommendations for future study , potentialindividual landmarks and historical notes. the context has been reviewed by staff and members of the historical preservation on the committee . the report includes walking tours and presentations and for several local and national organizations readthis includes the western neighborhood product , the spurand a society

ofarchitectural historians . >> . [ please stand by] >> a couple of examples as cultural landscape and additional language on the

evaluation of property and integration such as properties for developments data restrictions and covenants are tied to fair housing or anti-discrimination, legal challenges or civil rights action. and other forms of housing discriminations were prevalent relevant to san francisco and extended beyond the significance in the draft report. the history of housing discrimination, fair housing civil rights actions and legal challenges will be considered as the citywide. the department proposes that staff incorporate these updates along with any comments and updates recommended by the commission and finalized report. we'll return to the commission once these updates have been completed and the formal adoption of the residence of parks. this concludes my presentation. i'm available for any questions and i'd to invite richard

brandy who has done the preparation on his work. >> thank you, mr. brandy, you have 5 minutes. >> okay. i don't know if my camera's on, but you can see the first slide. francis, you're going to advance for me, right? >> yes. >> excuse me. my name is richard brandy with the western neighborhoods project. we did this historic context statement quite a few years ago started for the historic preservation fund committee and it's a little bit different than what you're used to. there are many of these residence parks and i thought is it would be useful to study a sample, just a subset of those that are out there just to give a range of the size and complexity and sophistication which are in the reports. so today, we're going to look

briefly at just two of the residence parks just to give you some visual distinction between the two. okay. the map shows where they're located which is in the report and they're all in the western part of san francisco where there was land available in the earl 20th century to do these kinds of developments. next slide. some of them, not all of them have these but the ideal residence parks have these colinear streets or future streets. next slide entrance gates, they all have sort of entrance gates and then st. francis wood on the right. these are smaller pillars that

are often used as well to designate that this was a special place that you were coming to. next slide. this is jordan park. now this is one of the two that we're going to very briefly go aeroand it has the pillars on the right that i have an arrow to, but they have been removed at some point where the track was laid out. this is gary street looking west. this is jordan park showing again. this is the western grid. the idea is the houses would be set back from the street and there would be these lawns

okay. houses are various styles. this is typical and residents park there's no one uniform style. this is st. francis wood, an aerial just showing sort of a bozart axial design which was always in the back of the mind of the developers if they could afford to do it or had the land, they would dry that. i might add that's st. francis circle which i would imagine and envisioned would be used for many years. it's not a circle but still called a circle today. and here's the entrance gates at st. francis wood under construction. okay. just some street shots of st. francis wood. we've got, again, detached houses, planting strips, setbacks, side, front, setbacks

are part of the deed restrictions in residence parks. this is, of course, before the time when there was really any kind of zoning and city planning regulations. so the developers had to do this on their own and make it a deed restriction rather than a city ordinance. public sculptures would set off the place and make it enticing for people at the time was at the edge of town and belvedere at the end of st. francis boulevard okay. and this is just again, st. francis wood showing the

sidewalk, the houses stepped back from the street. okay. this is kind of a summary of what this phenomenon gave to san francisco is that i'm calling it a gift to the city, but the suburban amenities that were not typically found in san francisco with landscaping. there was exclusively not to the super rich there's a degree of socialization to these communities. long term stability and high quality architecture i might add as a result of this

project, i got more interested in it and i was trying to figure out how many were. of the residence parks in san francisco and the next slide shows, i found 36 that were either planned or developed. they weren't all implemented in this time period. okay. i think that includes the presentation.

% >> commissioner: thanks. i share commissioner johns' comment. i want to say that when i first moved to town, i kept finding these very cohesive neighborhoods, i didn't know the history of them, but i just walked around with my jaw open because the architecture and clearly the planning was so extraordinarily well done and unfortunately like so many aspects of the history, we get the good and the bad and the development. that the residential neighborhood and the distinctive architecture and neighborhood amenities including organizing elements like setbacks and parks and

other characteristics and [inaudible] . there were a deplorable restrictions apparent in these developments and i'm glad that the supreme court finally stepped in to eliminate that. you know, i can't -- i did some exploring this week of a couple of the places i haven't been back to for a really long time and i look forward to sort of going through these neighborhoods again. i also want to thank mr. brandy because that was an absolutely fascinating report. that was very enjoyable and really informative. so, thank you. >> commissioner. >> commissioner: i look forward to kind of getting into these neighborhoods also. i've seen them sort of passing by but i've never explored them too closely and be able to explore those.

>> thank you. and ms. mcmillen, thank you very much for your presentation today and i also want to thank for providing the context for which this report was created. i still feel uncomfortable walking through some of these neighborhoods and when these parks were created, people who look like me were gardeners and they were not allowed to live in these areas and they were there for a certain reason and after they finished their business, they were told to promptly leave. so i'm happy, ms. mcmillen that you're going to expand on the racial exclusion that happened during this time of 1906 to 1940 because it was a period of very clear overt racist rules that did not allow people of color to live in various parts of town and that's why even after world war ii, there were

still a lot of ugly, racist, restrictive covenants that only allows people of color to live in the outer richmond or in the western district or maybe in the bayview. but that's it. i think having that historical context. having the actual copy of the laws that restricted people from living in various places and then showing the ethnic population of who lived in those neighborhoods provides a good context and goes along with our priority of social and racial equities. but i think the report is great and i think with those additions, it will be much better. thank you. >> commissioner: president matsuda, can i make a comment? >> president: sure. >> commissioner: i wanted to

say how it's a little bit of a political statement and it's directed at the school board where this kind of research that reveals, you know, quote unquote the dark underbelly of the bad side of the development of culture in any place, the kind of research that was done for this is what was missing from the school renaming this is our history and this is critical. we're in san francisco but the world looks at san francisco with the mythology of light and beauty and all these things where as this was just as much apart of our history as any

other city in america so i think that not only can we all learn and it is fascinating and i've gone through many of these neighborhoods loving them as commissioner black said. forest hill to me is like one of the cool neighborhoods of town but the depth of research and the depth of understanding of people who look like president matsuda can be part of that community is what we're about and i think that the way the school board went about it with the school renaming kind of did the culture and these

parks are beautiful architecture and beautiful places to live and we should all learn from it all. >> president: commissioner so. >> commissioner: i wanted to say something about cultural diversity and i echo my fellow commissioner president matsuda. this systematic systemic racism is real. and i'm proud we can make something right to put that into history that this is also part of our history and i do echo that there are times where i'm hanging around those neighborhoods and people are looking at me like oh, you know, people who look like me are not able to buy a home in san francisco until 1966 i am

proud that we're doing what we are right now to complete the fuller picture of what history was about and i'm really proud to be part of this planning department with all the staff that we are not only just talk the talk, but we actually mean what we say. we argue it. so, thank you, and i really appreciate everyone continuing to with all of us in a higher level with a more inclusive community. thank you for doing this. i love it. >> president: thank you. commissioner nageswaran. >> commissioner: i kind of wanted to circle back just because, you know, it does hit

home and, you know, thinking about what people say about cancel culture and the idea that, you know, we take away monuments and this and that, i think, i feel like there's things that we keep so we remember the history and we need to know the full broad breath of this history, but there were all these cultures that were canceled and we need to see them again, so the idea that there's like a cancel culture of, you know, monuments for civil war and things like that, i think, wait a minute, there was a whole other culture that was canceled in there and so that's what we're trying to get out and so i kind of cringe at that idea, but i am very appreciative of the fact that there's so many people that are coming together to do this and

i'm so proud of like the, you know, the social equity program that the planning department has. it really getses me excited as a person of culture and also of just a person that just loves history and the broad breath of it. i appreciate it so much and i just wanted to say that. thank you. >> president: so i don't believe there are any further comments from the commission. so thank you again, ms. mcmillen and thank you, mr. randy for making -- creating the report. >> clerk: thank you. that takes us to item number 10. case number 2021-000795des,

ingleside terrace sun dial and sun dial park. this is a landmark request to the board of supervisors. staff, are you ready to present? >> yes. let me just grab my presentation. >> clerk: great. thank you. >> there. can you see it? >> yes, we can see it. >> good afternoon.

on december 8th, 2020, the board of supervisors initiated designations of ingleside terraces sundial and sundial park. located within the intrad port. established in 1911 developed by the urban real tea improvement company by joseph leonard. ingleside terrace is comprised of single-family homes in a variety of architectural styles. both sited on large lots and landscape features. one of several residence parks neighborhoods in san francisco during the earl 20th century in the western portion of the city. detailed in the study of the city's residence parks. these neighborhoods were called

to emphasize the park like setting because of tightly controlled construction and use. examples of these restrictions include setback requirements to find minimum construction costs. landscaping guidelines. prohibition of commercial buildings. minority races and ethnicities. the property was previously identified in two department studies. san francisco's ocean view and ingleside neighborhoods. written by woody rebounty and richard brandy in 2010. and, it was also identified in the draft guardians of the city. the landmark designation fact sheet for association with the development of residence parks

neighborhoods. ingleside tare race sundial, and sundial park are also significant features of the early 20th century. putting grand entrance of stone pillars or other entry structures. neighborhood parks and landscapes, street scapes, mountains, benches. the subject property is further significant at the visual landmark in sundial neighborhood. announcing a development of sundial park located in the neighborhood has become a symbol of the community's identity. the terrace home association and has been the sight of community gatherings, celebrations and acted as an unsanctioned playground structure for the neighborhood's children. features can be found in the

landmark designation fact sheet. this includes the sun dial park. cast concrete 12 concrete benches and heart scape features. significance to the property is 1913. the date encompasses construction of the sundial and sundial park. meets two of the historic reservations. with the commission's prioritizization of sergeanting properties located in geographically located landmarks. these include the joseph leonard and the ingleside

presbyterian church. few landscape pictures among the city's landmarks. this includes the windmill, dutch windmill. washington square park and the gold light standards among others. and the h.p.c. recommends designation of sundial park as another land marc. the department before the recommendations to the board of supervisors. the property owner has been notified of the proposed landmarked designation. there has been no proposed as article 10 landmark. letters in support the designation received by the department have been forwarded to commissioners. letters to the board of supervisors during board review of the initiation designated to the site are attached as part

of the board of supervisors resolution package included in your package. this concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions. and much of the landmark designated fact sheet is also there to answer any additional questions. and jeremy sith from public works is also on hand to answer questions regarding the property. thank you very much. >> president: thank you. this now starts public comment. members of the public, now is your opportunity to speak on this item. if you wish to do so, please unmute yourself by pressing star then 3. you will be entered into the cue and once prompted to speak, you will have three minutes. seeing no members of the public

wish to speak on this item. public comment is now closed and the item is now before you. >> commissioners? commissioner perlman. >> commissioner: i did enjoy reading this. this seems like a no-brainer. mr. lenard as a promoter, i just felt like i was reading about p.t. barnham. with the panama canal and having the drama with the kids. i mean, it was just so enjoyable and it just reminded me of, you know, a part of a time in america that, you know, is long gone and, you know, and long before my time. but, you know, i just think this is a wonderful piece of

americana type history that we have in ingleside terrace. so i think this is great. >> president: thank you. commissioner johns. >> commissioner: thank you. i agree with what commissioner perlman said. it does show if at first you don't succeed, try and try again. and part of something that i have always found ever since i was a little kid and playing on that sundial, i've wondered why anyone would build a sundial out there. there's really precious little sun. >> president: i agree. >> commissioner: at any rate, no. really, this is more fun than the doggy diner hat initially. so i certainly support this landmark. >> president: do i hear a

motion from any of the commissioners? >> commissioner: yes. i move that we move this proposal forward. >> second. >> commissioners, there has been a motion and it has been seconded to recommend the board of supervisors the ingleside tare race sundial and sundial park. [roll call] moved. that item passes unanimously. this will take us on to item number 11, case number 2016-013156srv. this is an informational item on the citywide cultural resources survey. staff are you prepared to make

your presentation? >> yes. can i be the presenter please? >> yes. >> thank you. can you see my screen? i can still see you, laura >> yes. we can still see your screen. it's a little small. >> okay. great. thank you, commissioners. department staff. this is our quarterly update on the city wide cultural resources survey. today, i'll be joined by susan

parks and for the first time maggie smith who has joined the team officially for the last half of 2020. i just want to briefly introduce her maggie joined the planning department in 2018 initially and has recently moved over to full time to the survey team. the other side of the podium is the cultural resources planner and architecture historian. aside from working on historic research projects in san francisco, she also helped lead the san francisco district plain which involved a large field study and guidelines. we're very happy to have her. also, i'd like to quickly acknowledge our planners who will be introduced to you in more details. francis mcmillen. so, today, i'll just start off with a quick reminder.

this is a slide we shared last time about the overall methodology. just as a reminder, as we go through our updates based on the historic context statements which will include community input. the cultural heritage methodology which we recognize as being in development will also feed into these and once we have a better idea, we will come back with more detail on this particular slide related to overall methodology. >> sorry to sprupt. we're going to have chan share your presentation it is still a little small. thank you. >> okay.

okay. great. at this time, i will hand this off to susan parks who will guide you through this. >> good afternoon, commissioners. can you hear me? >> yes. >> okay. good. okay. susan parks, department staff. a couple quick updates for you on the status of the citywide survey since you last saw it in november. chan, can we move on. just a reminder for you, the hisstor context statements are the foundation for the decisions that we make about the identification and evaluation registered in treatment and historic property and survey. the basis for evaluating

significance and integrity and they give us adequate and appropriate context to be developed before we make our evaluation. next slide, please. context statements are special for historic writing. they are not intended to be academic exercises. rather they need to be direct and to the point and easily understood by the general public. next slide, please. as a reminder for you, we have organized the citywide context in three categories. one is cultural context and one that is architectural context. so this slide is just an overview of how we anticipate the context and their sub

contexts. so this slide demonstrates the seven context organized. if we go to the next slide, we can see in more detail how those sub contexts break down into their themes and sometimes sup themes. i do want to point out a few things that are in progress right now. you did see the residence parks come forward and staff to develop earthquake shack and more context statement that i'll show you on the next slide. environment changes in this slide as you saw in november as we go to the next slide, chan. you will see that there are a couple of changes here the one

thing i want the two evaluated frame works right now. i do want to point out we had a survey advisor meeting last month. i'm sorry. and we did get some good feedback from [inaudible] . a few things you'll see highlighted here were recommendations made. we previously [inaudible] to some religions eastern to be more exclusive and [inaudible] . traditions and if i could also change given anything else given as part of our efforts and the addition of the public

education context is part of this and just inadvertently admitted in some of the previous outlines that we've presented to you. we are counting for public education and we do have a previous school in hisstor context in the works. if we go to the next slide, one thing to point out for you in terms of cultural context in and the progress that we've made is that we have had some meetings with your more [inaudible] cultural districts over the past month to discuss funding and how we might go about starting a historic context statement driven by them with some help from us. and then we are also expecting to receive the draft of the counter culture historic context statement in the coming months, i believe.

let's go to the next slide. and then, this section's for architectural context. the highlighted portions are recommendations that we received from our five members of changes that we should make. just acknowledging right now, we had previously been calling this era the victorian era. i think it's going to be hard for all of us to adjust to a new term. so we are proposing a new term and that is specific and if we go to the next slide, chan. you can see the guardian era. we're moved the term [inaudible]

as we go through this process. if we go to the next slide. again, just a reminder, highly anticipating the survey at the end of this and then we'd present any previous and historic context statements or documentation that can be referenced. if we go to the next slide. and then to give you an update on things that we are accomplishing since our last hearing. we have been working to actively compete for internship 2020 projects. just a reminder, a builder evaluated frame work that was being off sunset residential track and seeing if we can apply that across the city to

other builder tracks. we were working on murals, police stations, transit infrastructures, telegraph buildings. using our technology of the environment era architectural styles that we were working to determine what architectural styles associated with what we call [inaudible] buildings. this summer, we'll have five interns as part of the citywide survey. we'll continue torquing on the architect biographies. working on architecture specifically. we'll do mass media which includes cultural newspapers, publishing, and broadcast stations across the city and then we are doing a builder tract theme setting mostly focused on research in terms of

who is responded for these buildings. and biographies. chan, can we advance to the next slide, please. and, just a reminder to you for our survey team. [inaudible] a reminder for you that you see our faces as we present this, but this is pretty much a group effort and many people are involved in this process including other staff who are recommended for working groups including youth consultants and our interim beach. the survey side. we're also getting a lot of technical support both internally and externally with graphics along with outreach

consultants. and of course, we have the opportunity to participate in focus groups, community meetings and as we work through [inaudible] we'll have ways to interact with us onsite as well. if we go on to the next slide. we do have [inaudible] that a specific milestone for us. we have seven members at this time. we have woody from heritage. we haven't seen the development but we haven't [inaudible] yet. some of you may know. here in the city for a few years based on the national

trust. we felt like he represented cultural heritage in that role. our san francisco historians. gwyneth borden. public policy for the most part. most of you may know her as the former planning commissioner. and then we have former preservation planner sophie hayward from her own consulting firm in the city. we are looking to set up a row stating sag in the next few months. we'd like to do that by engaging with the supervisors and having them select community representatives based on community historian representatives of the historical societies. that's something we can

hopefully bring back to you in the future with more finalized name and a plan on that. can we go to the next. i believe that's the end of my portion. i'm happy to take any questions once everybody's finished. for now, i'll hand it off to maggie. >> good afternoon, commissioners. maggie smith. department staff. i'm excited to be here to talk to you about the data collection and data management aspects of our very exciting survey. just to take a step back, next slide, please. the main objective when it comes to data collection and the survey as a whole is to collect information in the field. next slide. to refer to the historic context statement as susan outlined. there are lots of components of that. next slide. and to efficiently organize our

research and existing documentation. we have a whole bunch of information. it will be great to have it in a centralized location. so this will help us for individual properties. next slide. for districts next slide and for intangible resources. that we can develop findings and a dynamic cultural resources for years to come. this is what arches will help us do. so to dive a little bit deeper into arches, the arches platform is a solution for data management, data discovery and visualization and projects and task management. it's an open source software platform developed jointly by the getty constitution

institute. we're working closely with the getty to develop our own arches. arches offers a lot. and i'd like to point out some highlights that include information gathering through a mobile app. seemingly endless search capacity. things like circa or 1990s or 1970s, for example, or 1900s. community outreach and crowd sources capabilities. relationship creation and discovery and ultimately, the ability to publicly share all of our hard work. next slide. so a very well-known example of an arches instance is historic placing l.i..

here's a snapshot of their map interface. next slide as well as their research, as well as their search and report interfaces. next slide. so how are we doing with our implementation. the initial system design which includes how we collect, manage, and visualize our data is the farthest along since we're currently focused on drafting the unit survey model and what the typical collector projects will look like. so that's staff that will be bringing in to the field. as mentioned, or as will be mentioned later on, the pilot portion of phase 1 will begin in the summer. of so that's the data collection aspect and we'll be collecting information in the field and in the office. we've also begun reviewing our integration for reviewing into

arches. next slide. staff used collector providing a couple of years ago and the arches platform has since been upgraded as is our hardware. we conducted a test of our drafted unit survey and our model and working to fix a few bugs. so the next update will provide more specifics on the data design and data collection progress. that is it for me. i am happy to answer any questions at the end. for now, i will pass it off to marcel. thank you. >> great. thank you. i'll just update the commission on our thoughts on phasing and schedule. next slide, please. this is the phasing slide that was shared with the commission february 2019. we have some modifications.

next slide, please. so we've made a variety of modifications based on the successors. after taking into account h.b.c. feedback from the february 2019 hearing, the hearing in november 2020, the survey advisor's group in march of this year as well as balancing city and department priorities we had adjusted based on priorities including race and social equity. coordination with the very active community-based surveys. you know, coordination based on existing or plan context and their timelines. staff and capacity at different phases. >> with that, we have expanded the initial kind of five phases to six phases and that does include a pilot. the pilot allows us to test the

collective tools quickly based on the development track information we compiled and we feel this is apart of the city that is generally consistent. there are some unique items in the pilot of phase 1 area. the development pattern analyze that and then we can iterate the arches tool as needed. just a little more elaboration about some modifications. example, phase 1, we feel this better aligns with racial and social equity goals. which primarily requires community outreach. we need to do community outreach on the final draft before bringing it back to the commission. and phase 1 also coordinates as very active community-based

survey activities in neighborhoods of north beach and castro upper markets. other examples of how they're modified some of the phasing. if we look at phase 5. this area will benefit from more information that a modern addendum context will inform us on. so we've said in the phasing that we believe aligns with the current estimate on current time lines. happy to answer more questions on that. next slide. and, with all of that, this is our anticipated schedule for the each of the items in that were all surveys. you can see historic context data which has been ongoing for years. but we are hoping to have that kind of the whole city wide context adopted by mid 2024.

as you can see, we are concurrently undertaking the field survey and archival research components and that is where the phases come into play. while during the process of each phase, we will begin draft findings and we'll start to prepare our initial determination based on information we know on the citywide context at that time as well as field efforts and our research. so, at each phase related to the draft findings, we feel we'll be at 90% confidence in the determination. once we complete the context statement, we will then work towards finalizing all of the draft findings and bringing them towards adoption hearings at the historic preservation

commission. just noting on this quickly, this schedule is tight. it's based on our current staffing and doesn't really allow for staff transition to occur. we do believe we can likely shorten the time frame by approximately one year with a new planner staff commission dedicated to survey. this staff person would provide support on the draft findings work as well as the adoption hearing time frames. help shorten those. so in the past years, we have been fortunate to receive sf funding for the survey but yet at the budget stage of the process. we will keep you updated during these quarterly meetings if we do. and update the scheduled timeline accordingly.

next slide, please. so just a reminder of some items in progress. so we just wanted to provide a reminder of what we're doing for the questions that are being addressed. those are on the slide. we just wanted to give you a status. we are -- the project is i guess broken in to three deliverables. deliverable one is currently under the review by the department and this deliverable includes which we were really excited about a glossary for everyone to kind of base the conversation around and also includes best practices nationally and internationally. two will be the incapsulelation

of all of the focus groups that have been under way. city staff, city agencies, professional consultants, and other preservation organizations as well as their detailed focus through conversations with the cultural district representative. so we have just wrapped up about a week or two ago and so that's still being worked on we're hoping to bring recommendations and deliver in the fedex few months. next slide, please. we're also working to engage a consultant to development community outreach strategy. we anticipate working with in common their local consultants working on the cultural technology projects.

they're also doing work in san francisco especially working in communities of color. so we're very excited to be able to engage with them on the slide or just their initial thoughts on outreach and how they would approach that. next slide, please. next slide. so just quickly action item. we are planning to bring an update to the planning commission and update the board of supervisors as they were provided an initial update and briefing around february 7th, 2019. finalizing interface and collector platform. we're 'tis pating a next round of certificate meetings for may or june. and, lastly, we are recruiting right now for two planner ones

for assisting a field survey on research. and two temporary positions are being funded by previous for supervisor mandelman. so we're excited to be able to bring these individuals on. and just we're anticipating for our next quarterly update which we anticipate may or june cultural tare taj methodology and community outreach. and kick-off of pilot phase 1. we're happy to answer questions. >> president: thank you. we want to send it out to public comment. members of the public, now is your opportunity to speak on this item. if you wish to do so, please, raise your hand by pressing star then 3. once you're unmuted, you will be prompted to speak and then you will have 3 minutes.

there are no members of the public that wish to speak on this item. public comment is now closed and, commissioners, the item is now before you. >> president: great. are there any commissioners interested in making -- commissioner nageswaran. >> commissioner: so i had -- i'm just incredibly impressed. the broad scope of what you're doing is just great and just how you've organized it is so impressive and my questions are going to be very provincial in just that. when i've done work on that i've looked at the property map that planner haves set up and it's always very helpful. i wondered how the citywide survey would be connected to that or if arches would take it over or is it going to be some

things tandem. and, then, also, when you're doing surveys, i know often times, some of the things that i've said that have been on the boundaries up to different, you know, areas, so i just wondered like how do you distinguish what you're doing when you hit a boundary. and then, i see, you know, the previous surveys are being incorporated. are they also being refined in this project work and maybe some of this is already answered somewhere. but i would appreciate any feedback. >> sure. i'm department staff. i can maybe answer some of this. first question about pill. that's a great question. you know, the final [inaudible] will be integrated. pim will continue to exist and

they will now be a link to arches which will be a separate web interface. so we've been doing arches will post all of the historic information. arches also has an opportunity for more robust searches that are available on p.i.m., but we recognize that p.i.m. is awesome. it has been around for a long time. we feel like it's an easy way for, you know, the public and owners to get a snapshot of information. arches can provide additional information but aprils can also be used for other purposes. that's our usual kind of high level thinking, but it is something that we're planning to think about in more detail over this time period.

next will be the two previous surveys. yes, they are absolutely going to be incorporated into the arches platform because we want to be able to conduct robust [inaudible] amongst other things. there are -- we weren't planning to necessarily really look at previous surveys. we are planning with the caveats, we are planning to look at all previous surveys with a new overlay of cultural information, information we may glean from the citywide historic context statement. so that is something we're anticipating. a lot of our previous surveys they [inaudible] clean up and so that's kind of a long-term path that will run the entire length of the survey where we're putting the data in the format that arches can

read. so and the second one was related to districts and boundaries. that's a great question. i don't know if maggie or susan want to add anything here. my initial thought is, we have a lot of kind of eligible districts throughout the city. part of the process through cultural resources survey will be to confirm the boundaries and keg kenley jansen etc. of those districts. so, you know, i think that's a good point. you know, looking at the cross section between the two. so we need to look at really the distinction, are districts smaller? so i'll see if maggie wants to add anything to that.

no. okay. that's fine. so we'll continue to think about and open to feedback on that. >> president: thank you. commissioner black. >> commissioner: i just wanted to say that this is really impressive and comprehensive and i really applaud the changes in vocabulary. i think that's fabulous. it's confusing enough when realtors and others sort of take these terms to mean something different than what we're used to as great to break it down to the architectural styles rather to just a period that some british ruler was in. i strongly support that. >> glad to hear that. >> i have two questions. two comments. the first one is about looking at the timeline and now actually seeing a date certain

for this to be completed and this conversation started back at least a decade ago and now to see an actual and coming up soon, 2024 is not that far away is super exciting. so relating to that is my question about funding. do we need to worry about this at all. we're talking about commissions do we as a commission need to, you know, be reminded some of the supervisors that this is a really important thing to continue to be supported and that it will help not only us in this commission, but the city in general. i don't know if you want to

answer that. >> i think we're always happy when the commission wants to support our work as the board. take notes. we, you know, again, through supervisor mandelman, we are able to bring on to planner one at minimum for a term of two years. so we also have a large allocation from the historic preservation fund committee that was received last year or the year before which is allowing us to be flexible with consultant dollars. i would say, you know, a new position for the planner too would be to help [inaudible] along with just, you know, are tightening the timeframe. so, i think, you know, the department has, as you can see there's five people working on survey. the department has really put a

focus towards prioritization. so a lot of the work for the field work is our staff and so that staff has been allocated. of course, we'll always do something with extra money, but i think, you know, as we move along the conversation, you know, may change where we, you know, definitely need another application. >> president: we would appreciate it if you can keep us informed so we can help to support this process. >> definitely. >> president: and i just want to give a shout-out to susan parks because she really took the leadership and initiative to examine new ways of documenting and i think -- i don't want to lump it as

categorizing but new ways of looking at various periods of history. i appreciate that. thank you so much, susan, for doing that. >> thank you. >> president: any other comments for the commission. okay. all right. it looks like thank you maggie, marcel, and susan for your presentation. that's great. it's so exciting to see it come this far and it looks like it's going to go full speed ahead. so i look forward to working with you on that. >> thank you commissioners. if there's no further discussion, this places this on your last item for the day. item number 12. case number 2015-00071810th. this is another informational item on the preservation of landmarks. there's no action required by the commission.

marcel, are you prepared for your presentation? >> i am. i don't have a presentation. marcel, department staff. so this is an update on preservation activity as well as landmarks updates. as i noted in the memo, it would also be a cultural heritage update. i would like to hand this over first to rick from the office of small business who plans to provide an update on the legacy business industry program. i think it would be useful for commission questions on the legacy business program immediately after his presentation and then i can provide some quick highlights from the certified local government report that was included in your packets and give you a quick landmark status update >> okay. let's see if i can remember how to share my screen. here we go.

can you see that? >> yes. >> can you see my cursor just out of curiosity? >> yes. we can. >> i might use that. good afternoon commissioner president matsuda. i'm richard carillo with the office of small business. i got a little enthusiastic. it's about 25 slides, but i'll try to keep it to 5 minutes. so i wanted to just start off by saying that the legacy business program is one of the programs out of the office of small business serving the needs of san francisco's small businesses, that includes our small business assistance center where we provide one on one business case management services, our online business portal and new is the san francisco music and

entertainment venue recovery fund. we're administering in our office is actually i just want to take 30 seconds to say this is landing on my desk. so you do have some legacy applications coming before you hopefully six on may 19th and then we're going to be taking a two or three-month break in order to administer this grant. the quicker we review the applications, the faster we can pay these venues and the quicker we can get back to legacy applications. just want to put that out that. legacy business program can be found in code 2a243. just recognizing long standing businesses, our valuable cultural assets. just a tool for providing them with educational and promotional assistance and is

it and helping those businesses remain in the city. business assistance the historic preservation fund which the grants and legislation. and you can find all of our accomplishments in our annual reports which are on the osp website here. s.f.o.s legacy.org. so far we've had -- this is as of march 31st, so i'm going over items from the last fiscal year. so through march 31st, 2020, we have received 327 nominations,

293 applications, and we have added 239 businesses to the industry. i'm going to go over this quickly because you can find this all in the annual report. fiscal year. last fiscal year through march 2020, we issued

development and they have helped 211 clients and that's 1,seven hundred nineteen hours of technical assistance over the four years of the program. grants. we have the stabilization and is that my timer. oh, my gosh. i've got to talk much faster. >> president: just continue, please. >> okay. this was 5 minutes. so we issued 37 grants through march last year. stats here. you can also find in the annual report exactly who they went to. but grants totalled $1.2 million. oops. and in the program since it started in february 2017. i think we're up to 43 grants now a year later. business assistance grant, the last year of the grant was the

fourth year which was 2019-20 and we did 136 grants out to the businesses, legacy businesses themselves and they were paid by f.t.e.s, full time equivalent employees and i have to remember every time i click my mouse i go to the next slide. so, again, you can find all this and all the businesses the grants went to in the annual report. and this grant due to financial constraints is now over as it was voted in march of -- sorry. november 2015. but if we do get additional funding for legacy businesses, we can do something similar. we also had a one-time accessibility grant. we paid five grants totalling about 7,$000 to businesses to

help them with accessibility improvements. accomplish ams in this fiscal year that we're in now. so we have an annual report in progress. expect issuance expect it to be march 1st. it might take a lot of my time in may. i apologize if we do have a late issuance on there. and when it's done, it will be reported on the reports web page. so things that we did this fiscal year, we should request a proposal. a company to assist marketing efforts and create a new website. in october, we selected a san francisco woman owning company. we've designed and now live a new legacy business so this was a long time coming. we're very excited about it. you can search by business type or neighborhood or business name or any combination of the

three and we have a whole director here that's really exciting. major up coming activities for next fiscal year, we're going to continue with the legacy business industry starting up again probably in july. business assistance, of course, is ongoing and the rent stabilization grants. new services. i'm going to go over these quickly. additional web pages added to the website. rent stabilization grant database. to help us manage those grants. any other grants that come our way and potential legislation. marketing program, we've already created the website. that was january through march and april this month through may of -- i'm sorry. april this year to may of next year, we're going to be working on a promotional strategy for legacy businesses and the program including enhancements to the legacy website. we do have a contract with the

specific deliverables, but we found that might not be the best point of attack. so i think we're going to do a contract amendment and make sure we're doing exactly the right things, the things that the businesses want and things that design media think will be best. so we're in the process of pittsburgh iffing out what that's going to look like. the q.r. codes are listed in our list of possible projects. please note that i have heard you and we have added that to our list of possible things to do. right now, we only have four pages on the web page. as we add new services, we're going to add new pages to the website. so we're going to add things that are easy to implement. don't take a lot of staff time. um, so keep your eye out for more pages being added here. information of bronze plaques. looks like they're going to be installed by june or july.

that's really exciting. the design is completed and we've picked up the locations and we're working on staff approval. and yes, we are aware this particular location is tile. we're working on the rent database to manage those grants and any other grants that come our way. we can definitely, you know, manage. it helps legacy businesses and the music and recovery fund does include priority for legacy owned businesses and potential legislation, i would really love to explore the con sex of business it's kind of crazy. we would have coverage for legacy businesses during local emergencies that are otherwise not covered. that would get done in the next few years, but something i will keep in mind. we would also like to develop property ownership program that

helpsen able legacy businesses to purchase their buildings. and then there is a neighborhood anchor business program that supervisor chan is proposing that would complement the legacy business program. so we're just mindful that that might be coming forward as well. and that's it. sorry if i went over time. i know you've had a long meeting and if you need to contact me or have any questions i'm always open to answering questions. thank you. >> president: thank you. do we need to ask for public comment, laura? >> yes, we do. members of the public, now is your time to comment on the item. if you wish to speak, please press star then 3. once prompted to speak, you will have 3 minutes.

>> good afternoon again, commissioners. this is woody he bounty from san francisco heritage. i just want to first compliment rick and the office of small business. the legacy business website is terrific that came out. it's very clear. it provides a guide for the public to actually patronize legacy businesses in a very convenient way and we've been promoting it at san francisco heritage including in our recent newsletter. i want to also express my concern that i brought before you before that this commission wrote a letter for is the amount of before you.

>> president: thank you. any commissioners wish to make comments? >> commissioner: i would. >> president: commissioner foley. >> commissioner: i think we all need to work together to help get funding for you and what you're doing because and i know i say this a lot but these legacy businesses are the fabric of our community and they're critical for us to support and we need to figure out more ways to do that. so, rick, thank you for the work that you do and thank you for remembering qr codes. i really appreciate that and woody at heritage, thanks for everything you do. >> president: commissioner johns. >> commissioner: well, i wish that i had gotten on before

commissioner foley because he said everything i wanted to say that i would have. but i think this is just a wonderful program and it seems to be going pretty well, but it sure would be nice if we could get some more money and some more staffing, so maybe we can figure out a way to work on that. >> president: great. yeah. i totally agree, rick, i just really want to thank you and commend you ongoing from kind of nothing in terms of promotion to where you are today. it's great. you know, the plaques look great. you know, that was one of my things i wanted to see up a long time ago. how much are they? can you -- you're on mute. >> so, let's see, we have

contract for 95,$000 that includes everything. that includes working with the contractor. i think the plaques might be in the $1,200 range. >> president: so they're very affordable. >> we're going to provide them free to all the businesses. >> president: yeah. i hear you about the budget. i don't know marcel what we can do, but let's try to work together to increase that. i'm sorry you're also passed with this new grant program, but i really appreciate the new initiatives that you folks want to do, the business interruption insurance, the property ownership what supervisor chan does because i've worked with small businesses over this past year and i've seen the hit that they've taken and i was so worried that a lot of legacy businesses would go away.

but i think through some miracle, they're hanging on and if we can find ways to keep them going and just to infuse them with some immediate funding, i think that would be great. so i think these initiatives are great. i am happy to work with supervisor chan because i know she is particularly interested with legacy businesses and businesses in general that maybe through her we can see how we can get you some more money. anybody else? thank you so much for doing what you're doing and we really enjoy the legacy business that is came before us today. >> thank you. >> president: okay. >> thank you commissioner matsuda and all the commissioners today. that concludes your calendar. >> i had one more item. it was the second part of this. i'm sorry. i know.

we were so close. apologies. quickly. i'm not going to go through details of the certified local government reports it's shared in your packets. as a reminder as a clg, we have a annual reporting requirement to maintain our status. it's a requirement of this report. there is one area i'd like to highlight in the report today as was referenced several times related to priorities. we have noted a priority to start researching background how to incorporate q.r. codes and new technology. so this is something that the department is due to i think a lot of the conversation this commission has had. i'd just like to note it's notable that the american indian cultural district has their indigenous projects.

and they're working with sf heritage on this. we hope to support this and learn from that effort, but, again, we are starting this conversation kind of the department level along with others in the city to see what we can do for past, existing, and future projects. so we'll update you guys, you as the commission as we put some thought into this process to obtain your input as well. that's all. i just want to see if there's any errors or comments related to the clg. otherwise. >> thank you marcel. we're going to call public comment on this item. if you wish to speak on this item, press star and then 3, you will be prompted to speak. each speaker will have 3

minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm sorry. it's woody he bounty one more time from san francisco heritage. i just want to bring up since commissioner highland is no longer on the commission, he made a particular point last time marcel to report on the hasn't marks program that the mother's building was a particular priority that had been sitting on the landmarks program for maybe a decade now and he particularly wanted to see it done. so i particularly wanted to carry the torch for him and also put that if the mothers building can get pushed along, that would be a very good thing. thanks so much. >> thank you. that concludes public comment. public comment is closed and the remainder of the item is now before you.

>> president: commissioner johns, did you want to make a comment or was that on the item before? the previous? >> commissioner: that was the previous item. thank you. >> president: any commissioners? no commissioners. okay. i guess we're getting a little [inaudible] here. >> really quickly, i just want to say thank you, laura, what a great job today. thank you very much. >> thank you. thank you for all your support today and that concludes your calendar for us today officially. thank you. >> okay everybody. >> thank you. >> see you again.

>> and good morning, everyone. i'm the acting director of san francisco public works. i would like to welcome you all this morning to the celebration of the second street improvement project. this project has involved a collaboration of many as