the one here >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner black >> [kate black] here >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner foley >> [chris foley] here >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner john >> [richard s.e. john] here >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner erisa >> [ruchira nages waran] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner jonathan >> [johnathan pearlman] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner so >> [linda so] yes.

>> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner's force on your agenda as public comment and at this time people of the comments can address items of interest in the public which they can do except with respect to agenda items your ability to comment. tomorrow the public may address the commission for up to three minutes so now would be the time to press * three to be entered into the queue. you have three minutesgvñ?ñ. when you hear that your line has been an muted leisure indication that you can begin speaking. >> this is anita catalina and i am the owner of beyond tic studios which is at 950 battery street. i don't know if we are going to be addressing that issue immediately, it is the 940 battery street project, is that

going to be addressed right now or do we wait in the queue until later? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] you need to wait, will make all that is currently on the consent calendar however we have received word that people want to speak to that matter so we will be pulling the off of consent and will be heard at the end of the agenda. any other public comment or general public comment not items not on today's agenda. saying that requests are no request to speak from the commissioners the public, is closed and we can move on to department matters one the department announcements. do we have any announcements from staff? mech hello this is a director of current planning, doing a quick announcement before i turn it over to someone who has a few as well. we are shared with everyone we are netted to and now of the permit to center went to be fully reopened asvqñ?ñ? of july. this is a really exciting

milestone ofgñ?ñ getting back to post covid.dñ?ñ? there were no longer be needed of appointments in order to come over-the-counter permit approvals and we also be bringing back our ability for the public to come in and ask questions of her planning staff. we are really excited in this is a big milestone, we wanted to share that with you commissioners as well as the public. that'll turn over to marcel. >> hello, this is marcel. i have two updates and will ask if i should provide those now. the first is, the first updates from the completion and commission for the public and that we, as the preservation staff with the printing department are participating in the discussion with other big-city preservation leaders and creating a national agenda for preservation through the national trust. today it's actually the kickoff meeting and we will come back to

the hpc when we have request for feedback and for more information. we did what to give you a heads up about that exciting activity jonas, also has some background information on some think my brother now? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] it might be appropriate after the other announcements. >> [diane matsuda, president] there's other stuff announcements and that there is no other questions from the commission we can move on to commission matters item two, the president's report announcements. >> actually i do have a question for marcel. i guess the meeting that you're going to be participating in with the national track does include the inclusion"?ñ?ñ of or preservation issues that may be cities like san francisco, seattle, or los angeles are starting to incorporate as part of their normal program?

do you have any other information on that? >> him marcel might have more information. right now this is really the kickoff meeting to start talking about that agenda might look like. i think we could anticipate that we would be looking at, as you mentioned certain cities in certain activities and moving forward in the world and how to incorporate the practices. that is what we generally understand but the meeting is actually happening right now. that is okay, we'll deftly provide more details in the next meeting. okay that is exciting and thank you for letting us know. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] that is all right, is

there any other announcements for the two supervisor? >> under the commission president's announcement i had call with ben davis and dana king, they are part of the account force projects that the arc has heard him i understand will come back to the commission sometime in july. in the second, this announcement is i received some information from supervisor connie chan's office and they have initiated or they started to initiate landlord as a nation of the city cemetery, which is located in lincoln park. they included some information i will make sure is exported to all the commissioners about the funeral chapel. there is still a little bit of

the very, very old history of the chinese in san francisco remaining at the part and it's pretty exciting that this particular structure still remains and hopefully the hpc will have a chance to support this designation and to really recognize the community that has been here since the 1850s and has very little to no recognition and a lot of mainstream publications and documents. i personally find interesting and would be happy to share that with you. thank you supervisor jan for certain is initiation. that's all my comments here. thank you. >> [diane matsuda, president] marcel did you want to disrupt the process. >> i just wanted to briefly mention that carmen staff has been a supervisor's office as well as others almost on this potential landmark. it is very exciting and also

will be the first archaeological landmark that we will work on. look that i would want to give a brief highlight of the board initiated landlord processing that would look like for the commissioners would be familiar with that. as you may know the landmark process is generally a two-step process. the first step is initiation which can occur this body and important information or for the bird risers. right now the city cemetery is in the introduction stage of that initiating resolution and so there still can be of board hearings and this is before it makes its way to the planning department. where we would then start working on the second part of the landmark prospects but just to designation in the ordinance. so i anticipate that this will hear this item this year thank

you. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary]. great, thank you for that marcel under the president's report because we want to item three consideration and adoption of draft minutes with a may 19th 2021 hearing. there is of the public this is your opportunity to speak tosqñe minutes by pressing * and then free. we take the requests we do i sorry take request to speak from the public and the public, is close minutes before you. >> [diane matsuda, president] would this be adopted. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you on that motion to have the minutes be sworn. sure black >> [kate black] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner foley >> [chris foley] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] mister john >> [richard s.e. john] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner warren >> [ruchira nages waran] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner perlman >> [johnathan pearlman] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner so >> [linda so] yes.

>> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] this officially passes the stomach i have some announcements and i wanted to comment on the president matsuda and what was brought up about the cemetery going to be a virtual landmark destination. personally, i really connected to the tuttle source society of america and we have written a lot of papers the legacy in the historic significance of this. in particular the cemetery and i have known?ñ?ñ personally theree a part ofj÷ñ?ñ? chinese descentt ?ñ?r ancestors are buried in area. i am truly supportive of this and i'm excited this would be ñ?ñc landmark of the nation. i'm excited about this thank

you's riser chan leading up to suffer and of course with our favorite marcel on the staff. the second thing i would like to type about your amazing staff again that the california preservation conference and i have the luxury to be a participant to learn more about all things matter. this is in our amazing staff, allison vanderslice and also alex west off. actually i posted these amazing seminars and conferences that talk about ranging from mitigation and inclusiveness of our san francisco stork preservation, planning department initiatives. but we started i will share with everyone in california and it was very inspirational and they do a really and for amazing job.

eloisa seminars on the tape when he can go in and watch it again on demand. i highly recommend everyone to take a look and listen to what they have to say and it is amazing. especially as more entertaining than i would've anticipated. especially on the end of it it is about neon lights too, it's really, really cool pillar thank you for doing all of the work and i feel much more educated now. i'll do it again next year everyone i invite you do that too if you have not done so that is it for my sharing what happened last week.i■ñ?ñ? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you commissioner so if there are no additional comments from. >> i would like to say a few words. you. i do want to follow what commissioner so just said. i attended a number of sessions

last week and one of them alex west off was one of the presenters for the lgbt topics that we have recently handled number of them. that was brought forward in a very, as commissioner said in a very entertaining session. as well as a couple of others that one was about the rocket testing site in southern california. which is also a native american land and nasa and the native groups are going together to create a national historic site there. that includes both about prehistoric and pre- american development of the area as well aszwñ?ñ? then the 1560s, 70s

testing of rocket engines that went to the moon and were in the shuttles. so that was absolutely fascinating. i do encourage everybody to attend and take i also wanted to comment on the article that was in the paper couple weeks ago about the project that would be your concourse that that we heard at the architectural view committee last time. the article if you have not read it please take a look but it was in the chronicle on cat river the date, it was about two weeks ago on a sunday. the article, i was as

commissioner pillay will acknowledge, i was pretty passionate about my feelings about the project and the article i thought was fairly evenhanded, it did quote some of my thoughts pretty accurately ■. most of it has to do with the idea of putting words on the speckled house of sick which i think is a bad but i thought there were in there was a comment from the artist, dana king, she believed that to be but not being completely supportive on our committee because you're not african americans cannot understand and i felt that kind of comment which was certainly not the case at all my, was specifically

about the protection of the historic the city which is what our submission is charged to do. i saw that and i found it ironic i went back and found five landmarks over the last four or five years there were five specific landmarks that are related to the african-american community and we all managed to understand the value of it and the importance of particular locations and were able to vote on it. i just felt like her words were more of the kind that separate us whether to bring us together and i found that quite disappointingnjñ?ñ?. part of i am saying all of this is because i did see that the owner has nominated someone for my seat. i anticipate that i won't be on

the commission when this comes before you. i just thought it was important to get some of my thoughts into the public record because i did have parts of the interruption on and from the committee. one other point, which i things important, mister davis who is proposing to put his words on the bandshell building two pieces about that. one is that it's not historically accurate, which i think is important for this commission. i went back and looked at the sheet music that was published -aeet music that was published list every voice and the sheet music is entitled list every voice with every spelled ev ' are white. the words that mister davis wants to put on spells the word

v-lowercase-letter el y. that i felt was inappropriate. i think it's inappropriate to put anything there but if you're going to allow that to please take a part it accurately. there is a lot of discussion about the coincidence of the music was written in 1900 and the man shall building was built in 1900. that equivalency was striking to me my grandfather was born in 1900. has nothing to do with either of those two things and it turns out that the template music was completed in 1899, with the music congress completed 1990. i just found out the flip attitude of an artist who is trying to present something on a historical building in san francisco to be very, very carefully scrutinized. i appreciate you give me this moment and i am sad that i will

be with you at that time. i'm sad to be leaving the commission but i do think that it is in an amazing hands with the other commissioners. the person is been nominated i think is probably qualified and i think will be a great addition. thank you. speak to seeing no additional cost to speak to commissioners we can move on to consideration of items for continuance. item five, case number 2020- [inaudible] gary street in permit demos for continuous of july 7th 2021, and 900 avenue its appropriateness is for continuous from july 201st come to this 121.

numbers of the public, this is your opportunity to speak to those being proposed+kñ?ñ? for continuance by pressing * than three. okay. next onto the matter of continuance. next when you hear that you went . commissioners us is deborah quick morgan louis and bockius. i'm representing louis vuitton and arcana who work ground-floor tenets of the project site and i just wanted to let you know on here. i assume that you would open for public comment again on the substance of the proposal in the event of the matter is not continued correct? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] is being proposed for continuance today. are you suggesting a later date? there will be public, on the substance of the matter. right now are only taking a

public comment on the matter of continuance. >> we have no problem with the continuance, we are just interested in understanding better the project. there's been very little information provided about it thisxfñ?ñ?ñ far. we support the continuance. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] great, thank you for more information regarding the project can always reach out to the project planner. this public last call for comments proposed we will continue. seating no additional request to speak public comment is closed and the matter is proposed for continuance before you commissioners. >> i vote to be continued. >> a second >> [jonas p. ionin, commissionwtñ?ñ?ñ secretary] thu commissioners on a motion to continue matters is proposed, commissioners may not be sworn. commissioner black b3 yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner foley >> [chris foley] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner johnson >> [richard

s.e. john] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner pte 84-24 >> [ruchira nages waran] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] mister perlman >> [johnathan pearlman] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner so >> [linda so] yes. on the >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] on your consent calendar all matters to consist of a contents calendar are considered to be routine they may be acted upon single call by the commission. there be no separate discussion is items and left a number of the commission and the public our staff so requests. which invents them actually removed from the consent calendar and considered as an item at this point in in future hearings. item seven for case number 2015-001-0308 and four battery street. the certificate of appropriateness. commissioners we have received a request to remove this but we will do that primitively now move that to the end of your agenda today. leaving item 84 case numbersújp

[jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you commissioners on the motion to approve what item eight under your consent calendar, to commissioner black b3 yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner foley >> [chris foley] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary]

commissioner john c5 yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner pte 84-24 >> [ruchira nages waran] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner perlman >> charles the four doors. >> i am sorry, i think liz wanted to formally introduce me.

>> sorry, that we run a different item, i apologize. that's my thought, thought it was losing it. >> yes liz luddy, director of corporate planning i just wanted to introduce charles he has been with the planning department of two years. he has recently moved from our environmental3ñ?ñ? siting divisn current planning where he joins northeast team has a preservation planner. he also serves as a preservation planner liaiskñ?ñ?on for ethicsa project. he received his bachelors in urban and regional planning from cal poly california and prior to working for us he was occurred preservation with the cities of phoenicia and berkeley. for work charles continues his planning activities serving on the city of berkeley's landmark preservation commission and enjoys being on his dog dallas and flying his drone. like many of us is an important international travel again and plans on visiting ghana. thank you commissioners and we are excited to introduce for the first time , charul.

>> charles welcome.rñ?ñ? were super excited to have you as part of our team. the planning department that's quite innocent to see you here. >> it's nice to see some of you again i think i've met some of the commissioners prior to covid but for those that i have not, hello again. today i am presenting item number nine on your agenda, request for certificate of appropriateness to replace the main entry doors and then widening of an existing interior ground-floor connection between the subject landmark the bank of california and the adjacent 21 story tower addition. we have the project sponsored here today and there preservation consultant carolyn jim will present shortly after me. 400 california street is located within the financial district on

the north side of california street, with additional frontages on sampson street to the east and hallett cße landmark-%g+y■n)t;#■ number thr. the landmark was constructed between 19 okay six and 19 okay eight is the headquarters of the bank of california. the oldest inc. commercial bank mistake. the steel train, two-story building, one started basement level was designed in the classical revival style. with temple form by master architectural firm. this contains granite and marble exterior. each of the banks three street frontages, or call with three corinthian style columns altering with large multi- light windows. the interiorey(9w? contains a cl main banking hall, rising to a coffered ceiling and an unbroken space 54 feet tall.

in 1967 architectural firm ash ñ existing aluminum main entry doors as well as interior vestibule. all original materials within this main opening were moved and this included the exterior bronze lettuce transom, at the bronze doors and the interior vestibule. i think the product description, the scope of work involves work of approximately 9,300 square feet of retail to office use and as i previously stated, what is subject to the certificate of appropriateness is the widening of an existing interior connection. the ground-floor connection would be widening to an accumulative eight to 10 inches and then removing an existing step between the two buildings to accommodate a wrapped for accessibility and egress requirements. the interior vestibule, sold 1967, would be removed and the

alterations at the main entry under option one include replacement of the existing black finish that main entry doors with anodized aluminum doors in the same dimensions with the dark bronze finish. the new doors would be correct pull force code requirements and as project sponsor we will get more into detail later under would include specific main entry new and anodized aluminum and framing and anodized aluminum doors and and polished bronze to finish. under option two, the doors would?ñ?ñ? get whiter and the existing multi- light transom window would be put placed for single light transom window. the landmark designation for the

subject property does not specifically enumerate character and defining features of the banking hall. however the proposed project will remain a publicly accessible through monthly guided tours and it will retain all interior features. the project sponsor has summarized the character definingattx features on the sht one. they have also been captured under exhibit d, of the environmental determination or i apologize, exhibit d. staff would like to inform the commission that we will request that the project sponsors develop an on-site interpretive program for this particular project and the appropriate mechanism of approval would be under the conditional use authorization.

staff finds that the project proposal provides for a new use, which respects the properties architectural significancelñ?ñ?. this is for the integrity and his technique stylistic features and craftsmanship thatúe characterized the building would be preserved. the existing entry doors and vestibule installed in 1967 have not required any significance in their own right, the new features including the accessible main entry, the white interior ground-floor connection, will be compatible with the historic resource, though designed in a way to read as contemporary. and the widened interior ground-floor connection, which will move accumulative 8 inches, is found to be minimal and will not disturb historic features of

the landmark. it should also be noted that staff has requested that the project sponsor development tenant guidelines which they will get into more detail to in a moment. and it may be that within the hpc desire to comment on those pending guidelines that will provide guidance to future tenants as well as interior remodels. so as summarized in the executive summary staff finds that the project and both options are consistent with the secretary of interior standards and article ten of the planning code. however due to the extent of

option two staff is recommending approval specifically of option one and again, this is within hpe whether they will support specifically, option one or option two. this is for the mainñ?ñ? entry. my presentation is done.d■8xg >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you charles, project sponsor you with this? >> yes this is caroline can you hear me? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] guess we can hear you and you have five minutes. see met think great i think there is a presentation to be brought up as well and hoping that the time that we started >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] we are holding your time in >> thank you so much i will try to be as fast as i can five minutes is going to go quickly. he wanted to thank you for having us here today and charles, thank you for your

time. commissioners and president matsuda thank you for hearing us today. i am zñ?ñ? also here with our lr project team he will be available to answer any questions they include michael eadie, who is sponsoring owner and dan baroni, the architect and mary murphy and sarah sohn darley with the council done. we have had the privilege of working a 400 california team since 2017. next i please. as charles mentioned, it before you today we are focused on two fairly minor scopes of work, literally the last leg of our very careful and voluntary upgrade for the building in the past couple of years. stice 400 california seismic tower at 430 california street. at the roof level is a very expensive and complex and labor-intensive seismic that is

designed to protect both buildings from damage to future seismic events. we like to point that out to just show that they are in great level of care on this building already and this is a treasured resource by all and i just want to stress the care they were moving towards with this project. the current, that charles mentioned includes installation of new entry doors, the lightning of the opening of the interior and removal of any existing non- historic test fuel. the new doors, on the interior and exterior are the widening of the opening and the new doors are intended to satisfy thekúñ?? tuttle 24 access, ada compliant and the egress issues within the building.fñ?ñ we can go into that with a little bit more detail. the primary project goals are to allow the ability of use to be able to meet current demand for this type of space, to make the

code requirements for accessibility and egress and we have the ability of the interior of the building from the sidewalk. these. very briefly to charles was already, 400 california was as were the original bank of california headquarters, hemp company headquarters designed by the master architect and the construction was completed in 19 okay eight. as one of the earlier designated and marks we the importance and value of this. the exterior and the interior of the building are fairly intact with exception of alterations that were made in 1967 which is been addressed already by charles. this included the replacement of the building's exterior doors and transom sidelights and has be seen above the door. next slide please. i'm not going to go into too

much detail here but we have taken some time to identify and work with the planning department on the character defining featuresimoz>■ on bothe exterior and interior of the building. next light. next light again. thank you. the historic entrance, as you can see in the far left included a very heavy transom bar that was higher up than the lower stream doors down below. you can see in the far right image that the original volume of space. there was a pillar, windows and despina longer exist within the building. i think that is an important point that is to be clarified before moving forward. please. the slide shows the existing condition on the far left their original condition the far left and the original commission in the middle, which charles pointed out which is aluminum

steel and glass doors are now painted black, there has been some alteration there as well. we don't think that this condition is particularly compatible with the existing building and we would like to include a higher quality and more compatible design with the buildinggn?>g itself. the image on the right where you see the wood doors the sliding wood doors, those would be original to the building, they still exist and those doors are in the closed position of the building is not open. i just want joel to be aware that those do still open. next slide please. the two areas outlined here in red, the main entry there is the resuming x tubule vestibule of the interior and then removing and replacing them with known a lot and the interior could see

the west door open. i just have one more minute or so. next light, we quickly show you i will just go to one particular slide, next slide. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner are you okay with that? okay you have one minute purchase will recycle next slide. next slide. the slide right here i would like just to show the proposed option two, our team prefers. we also met with san francisco heritage and this was the preferred option as well. the image on the far right shows the proposed new transom inside like that would be adar anodized aluminum and the doors which would be taller than the existing doors, the existing doors are only about 7 feet tall. we propose a new doors to be about 10 feet tall which would provide more visibility into the space and that an unobstructed

view into the space and up to the ceiling, which charles mentioned in height and it would more closely resemble the matching character of the original design. which you can see in the far left. thank you, we can leave it at that and we look forward to hearing your comments and take any questions you may have. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] great, thank you. there are no immediate questions from commissioners to this we should open a public comment. but members of the public this is your opportunity to speak on this matter by pushing start and three. single request to speak from members of the public commissioners public comment on this matter now before >> [johnathan pearlman] yes, thank you. i was all prepared for this one a few weeks ago.

i agree with the project sponsor that the option to seems more closely related to the original. and also for a building of the scale the idea that a residential hyatt to 7 feet, seems rather small and does look out of character. now is a look at their original economy in the condition. i would prefer the option that is option two. the connection to the tower building, i think it is very clean and it is extremely minor change and makes no real impact on the interior because no one will be able to perceive in a room that scale in eight or 10-inch difference in the with of that opening. i am inclined to approve this.

>> thank you for your comments, commissioner ptenjy/ 2 84-247df >> [ruchira nages waran] i have a couple of questions. know the staff recommended option one because of the minimal change and it does not require any additionalubñ?ñ?ñ restoration. but if they are removing the interior vestibule i expect there is some touchup of the interior surfaces. they were to go with option two i would expect that some kind of restoration would occur where that entry was removed and patched. so, the question is, is the interior also removal of the vestibule going to involve patching? and then are the other entries into the building, i just got a quick glimpse of the plan and sorry i don't remember if there are other entranceszvñ?ñ? that n

and alec had touched. in which case of this particular entry is changing doesn't have a relationship to the other entries on the building or anything on that level? and would it look odd or do the tentative permits or=c like that need to address a consistency force future changes of the façade? those are my questions and in order to understand option one and two if the sponsor can answer those. >> hello commissioner pte 84-24, this is carolyn. because there's very minimal overlap between the 1916 in the 1967 vestibule and the existing stone of the interior. we don't think that they will

look any different there might be some minimal patching with the thing is you have to remove it and see what the condition is underneath it that we do not anticipate much, if any patching fired their. we do have, i guess regarding the interior that connection into the space itself. we do have a drawing, it's in her present station and i'm glad that if we are able to pull again let me see if i can tell you which pages oníññ?ñ? actuale might have to open it up. charles, what i'm looking for is the rest elevation of the interior. yesteryear.c■?ñ? so, the dashed area and red is the door way that is supposed to be enlarged by nine to

10 inches. if you look to the left of that there is another r$■ base opening that is original to the building. it also does connect to 430 california, but it does not provide is the distance required between extant and we need to exits for the space. so this has to be used for any duty on the future, we believe that we had to have the access and appropriate distance from two of them. the widening of the opening on the right which leads to 430 california and also any crust exits at the alley. i do have the project architect on the phone and i can get him on if you agree more information about the design and code compliance of be helpful. >> [ruchira nageswaran]. thank you for those answers.

>> [diane matsuda, president] commissioner did you want to receive comment from the project as well? >> [ruchira nageswaran]. sure, i would be great if they want to provide additional information but i think i'm okay with the interior access through to the other building, i was more interested in debating between option one and two of the entryway and tell the other entry from the exterior are affected or look >> [johnathan pearlman]. i don't believe there are other trees. right art. >> the project architect if you have any comments we can unmute him he can speak no i think. >> yes, can you hear me the primary entrant that would

have been talking about here is the only exterior entry at grade to the building, or window for that matter. all other periphery of this building is entirely encased in stone. that connection overturn passage on the west elevation is actually into the adjacent 30 tower base. our new proposed location will have an accessible ramp which will will make a larger opening which connects the two buildings and is actually slightly off of a current ada slope, we intend to have it be completely compatible because that is the opportunity now for us to make use of future bathrooms inside of that historic, inside of the 430 tower to put bathroom

facilities without having to go within the historic bank branch. >>/rgzq [diane matsuda, preside] commissioners did that help)h5e? p6 yes i was very helpful. i was looking at the plan again and saw that there were not any other entries.ccsno) i think andgcñ?ñ? the edge of tt interior opening to the tower building i see that it is newly finished and still edging. as far as a stone is finished, is that going to be a review if there was in the previous original configuration? or is it just going to be straight and then the steel edge

applied? >> our attempt would be to emulate the existing roof dictated, thus the term i think i'm not sure, the curvature of the stone elements without abandoning going up around so that would be ensuring the new wider, entrance and to maintain that length of the top much like it is today, only a little wider. >> [ruchira nageswaran] i would guess i was talking about the small review that was on the edge of the stone that is sort of up the edge of the opening. >> the steel surround? >> [ruchira nageswaran] and no, right at the edge of the stone itself i seem to recall on the drawing for existing pictures, there's a slight recess in the stone that makes a@i■ñ?ñ?little

bounding around the opening. >> [ruchira nageswaran] there is stone dancing around the edge, and then there was an existing front doorway there >> [ruchira nageswaran]. i see. i'm seeing the light-colored thing on the outer edge there that sort of closes it. sue met by referring to the proposed design? >> [ruchira nageswaran] no, you just showed an existing picture of it is stop by the lu coloring, i see the edge of the opening is a small review. >> [johnathan pearlman] i think that's the wood frame is in it? success and just painted like the wood stone. >> [johnathan pearlman] i think if your group that would, my

understanding is if you remove the wood framing of the straight top edge of the stone. >> the accurate? >> i believe so. in the intent to have the mental fame protrude ever so slightly beyond the stone is to protect the existing stone that remains so we don't have people walking by the bags or that might shift the stone. could cycle the frame on the door today. >> [ruchira nageswaran] is there a reason why he would not just h;3yp■ one of tr than two sides like going from one direction? >> there is a concrete shear wall on both the historic side, just the interior were just on the inside of that stone wall and on the 430 tower site.

we are not able to go wider on one side versus the other. without having some significant structural modifications having a trickle-down effect beyond opening. >> [ruchira nageswaran]. okay, thank you so much as all my questions. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you, commissioner john. >> [richard s.e. john] this is such a comment to me anyway and extraordinarily important building that has and has very, very good if not perfecth3@ñi cf the past. i think that this is a way of saying i think that the option two is the better of the two because it gets closer to what was originally there. there were a lot of things that happened in the 60s that were member quite fondly the

alterations to buildings were not necessarily the high points of that decade. i think that we could really do this building by getting back as close as we can to what was there originally and i think option two does that, next my comments. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you, commissioner so. >> [linda so] i agree with commissioner john's comments. it is the better version of it and option two is a challenging building to restore also. one technical question is that, not really coming across seeing if it makes an ada button but for this entryway so it's either the door that you are proposing to install in option two.

this is meeting the american disability act requirements and our cities accessible storefront? or are you planning on to do one of those ada bar? i like to. >> we do intend to have a freestanding bollard that would had a budget elevation with vertical height, low pressure point to original source. with the large volume of space on the inside and the mechanical ventilation, we don't believe that would be able to have doors that were close while maintaining that pressure on the inside to the differential to

the outside without having pressure requires offering those doors in excess of california code and for that use of an operator in either option one or two would be necessary. thank you for addressing the question. >> [diane matsuda, president] any other comments from the commissioner questions from the commission? >> [kate black] somehow i typed in but it went away. >> [diane matsuda, president] go ahead commissioner black. >> [kate black] out for so wanted to that i appreciate the scope and the seismic upgrades that the because the current guardians of the spectacular building and they appreciate that they are going to this extent it isfaóíñ%■ important fr preserving a really important building. truly, this is our third landmark and it is a splendid

place and we really i feel honored to be able to discussion about this. and i get it, to have modifications made to meet current building codes, modifications i have no concern whatsoever about the removal of the vestibule or alteration of the interior door or i also wanted to say i appreciate staff interest in preventing lots of change to our landmarks, which i believe that option one cheese that and in general i support that approach but in this inference i actually prefer option two and i agree with commissioner johnson, gets closer to the look of the original but more importantly, and i hope, it will allow clear

for better view into the spectacular made space to this administration that has just spectacular position in the windows. i think it offers a better opportunity for that and also the doors are more appropriate to the feel of the interior space. so i will option two. >> [diane matsuda, president]. thank you are there any other comments or questions from? i have a few questions of staff , charul or you here? staff has recommended option one and i was wondering if you could maybe provide for further inform us of an analysis to decide on option one over option two. it is one question in my second

question is to record the on-site interpretive program i'm always a fan and a proponents of making sure that we tell the story about our history and in particular of this building. it is the oldest commercial bank in the state of california. that is super important and just wondering what does that entail? i want to make sure that everybody has heard about this building. i have been honored to be in the building, i've been honored to go upstairs when it was the bank of california. it is a fantastic building and so i want to make sure that everybody knows today as well as 50 years from now as well as hundred years from now about the importance of this building. so, if you could share some comments with us that would be great.u !6ú

can you hear me commissioner? during staff analysis we did identify that both options would be consistent with the secretary of the interior standard and it was just staff consensus the due to the extent of the alterations that they could provide materials that are more in keeping with the original building, which would be bronze. so, our i guess middleground was to support the option that had the least amount of change. and then in regard to the on-site interpretive program, that is something that staff would like to see and that is not something that the sponsor team has put forward in their initialqsñ?ñ? application, but d like to lead to the sponsor speak to what they wanted to provide in terms of interpretive

program that is okay. >> [diane matsuda, president]. sure. >> i would like to say that we've had plenty of conversation about what on-site interpretation would look like for this building and the owner can speaker as well but they are definitely going to listen to developing this for public access. interpretive program as well as public access and interpretive program that would allow the public into the space for designated times as part of the tour and that would also provide to our code on the exterior of the building that could quickly lead to more additional information about the building. and also a video but its0óv as this is where they can sign up for the weekend to work. yes, thank you for pulling that slight up. that is what we have put together from several projects.

you can see that there is a qrq? code that is embedded in the display panel itself. we were thinking that where that could be eventually and somewhere on the exterior of the building. something that would allow quicker access to the public to access information about the building. there was a really interesting video interpreting the component and basically you can see in the lower right-hand corner that we have an interpreter speaking. we do know that we need to design this prior to our planning commission hearing, which is scheduled for july 15th. so, let's see i don't know michael might be able to talk to from the owner's perspective if you like to amuse him. >> thank you carolyn and good afternoon commissioners, my name

is michael and i represent the building owner at 40430 california street. i think that you summed it up, our thinking and maybe as commissioner brock your comments on the oldest commercial bank and i just wentwdñ?ñ to stress d emphasize how important this building is to ownership, along with another corporation and dan kennedy we will and to treasure this building. we just finished 820 plus we just zinished 820 plus without basically protecting the 400 california building and all of that work was accomplished without any exterior or interior to the historic fabric. it was quite a complicated retrofit. it was utilizing the technology the first of its kind in the

first in the united states. and one thing that i brought up at the heritage commission was, kennedy wilson and i kind of compared telling the story of this interpretive program and how important it would be for us in the benefits for not only are tenants, but the public, we do a lot of work in the state of hawaii. we have a couple of projects that are really rich and cultural and archaeological resources. we spent a lot of time meeting with the defendant and just talking to the people and the stakeholders and finding out what is important in developing and interpretive program of the sites that tells the story. we can work with the resources within the city and the heritage commission and your commission to have the interpretive program

lived in other spaces besides just here. with the amount of time that people are researching and appreciating these types of resources, i think i just want you to know that you have the ownership commitment to really make this a priority and a goal with loving care. thank you. >> [diane matsuda, president]. thank you any other questions or comments from the commission? >> [johnathan pearlman] i have one related to that, the preservation staff to pay attention to how the interpreter display and that qr code on the exterior and how it works out. because we discussed before and one of my ongoing comments since i had on the commission, is about how do we tell the story of our buildings? of our culture and our place.

and define a model where we can have a qr code on the outside of the building so that someone walking by could access all of that information, we develop that amount of really interesting information on every one of these projects. so, this seems like it could be a really good model for future projects and something that we might even want to go back and go to all of the existing landmarks. i don't know if some of you have seen on the franklin rights building, he developed of tile, small tile with his initials in it and he would mount it somewhere near the front door, kind of blow to the right. so no one would mistake that this was a franklin rights building. it could be something similar where a small tile or something could be made that could be put

somewhere on every one of!■ our landmark buildings to tell the story because we have the information, how do we get it connected to the public because typically people walk by buildings and of course there is no way for them to know one way or another what it's about. i think this is great opportunity offered by this particular client and this interpretive program. thank you. >> [ruchira nageswaran] i agreed i think it should be included as part of a process today depending with the commission and how the commission votes on either option one or/bñ?ñ? opti. >> i move that we approve the option of them or approve bññ?ñe pod project with option two. >> [diane matsuda, president] without amendment but they interpretive interpretive program to be included in. >> [johnathan pearlman] is already in there, i thought that was a ready part of it. >> [diane matsuda, president] i just want tos[ñ?ñ? make it cleat

that is a strong desire of the commission to make that a part of this. >> i would defer to quad dean had a word that in your motion but we will capture it in the conditional use authorization. >> essentially commissioners of that was your desire you would just add that as a condition. >> [diane matsuda, president] i like to add that as a condition i second the motion. >> [diane matsuda, president] with the condition? yes. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] very good commissioners, i do see that someone is requesting to speak. thank you for them to be interrupted for just a moment. groups wanted to let you know that we are using maps for the purview and this will go before the planning commission and it is more appropriate, i should say to have it tied to the cu because this is a conversion of anzk6,n%oñ office andso

interpretive display is one of the reasons why we would be able to make a finding that we could grant the ceo for the space on the ground floor. he wanted to have us come before you because we wanted your input and often times the planning commissioners want to hear what the historic preservation commission has to say in these matters. i would respectfully request that you change your motion and we will make sure that it is included in this the approval from the cu. >> [diane matsuda, president] i think that's fine as long as it's very clear about what the commission has shared today 7 not just the interpretive program, but having that activity access. through a qr code or any other means that could really show the history. >> absolutely. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you, in that

case i believe that the motion does not include any other conditions but could be somewhat awkward to have a single condition of approval i think that if you're okay we can certainly add as a finding in the motion so that at least the stork preservation commission can acknowledge the fact that it is on there under their expectation is the planning commission will be adding it as a approval related to an on-site interpretive programs. >> that's a good idea. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] very good then. is it okay to make this motion? >> yes, i think that's fine and so the motion would be to approve with option two? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] with option to adding the finding run into the on-site interpretive. >> that's fine yes. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you fellow commissioners come on that's motion then for commissioners to approve option to adding a part being related to the on-site interpretive program

commissioner? >> [ruchira nageswaran] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner black >> [kate black] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commission are fully >> [chris foley] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner john >> [richard s.e. johns] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner nageswaran six yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] and commissioner and president matsuda? >> [diane matsuda, president] yes. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] for the portsmouth square improvement project, this is for your review and comments. i believe someone wanted to introduce the matter with some opening remarks. supervisor peskin's office are you with us? you need me to unmute you? okay there you go. >> can you hear me? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] began yes. okay great. thank you for that hi everyone

thank you so much for considering this informational item today. this is been a very long road for the chinatown community and all of the amazing stakeholders and organizations that have been helping to cohost, to translate through outreach for the square master plan as well as helping to identify fundingg6h what is really the living room of chinatown, but is really kind of the heart of economic commerce of our programming for seniors, as well as i think covid showed us the possibility of what and importance of this historic plaza, one that you all

know is one of the original three historic clauses in san francisco during covid we have utilize the site for emergency response, protesting, vaccine outreach and so i think that in the years leading up to the project, hopefully this is pending approval planning the department of the environment is part of the emergency management and this is all done really an amazing job how this plaza could be and more than just a clubhouse, more than just a playground and really this project is the culmination of a tremendous amount of public outreach. i think commissioner have popped talked before about how this

project has gone above and beyond the number of public meetings required to check all of the boxes for community outreach. i really want to give a special consideration and kudos to rack and part and the reckoned part commission and then planning for really endeavoring to do this process and language. which is, historically been a real stumbling block i think for the city as it attempts to do competent and inclusive language outreach. we have managed to do that i think really well. the various groups have participated include the chinatown park and rec committee, community association which has over 2400 members that are mostly bilingual or monolingual chinese thinkers. he evokes of the elderly helping which work since a lot of seniors in chinatown as well as

the community youth center which does a lot of programming at some of our other rack and part facilities that have also been playing an important rolecud' in hosting learning tubs during the duration of the pandemic. really, what you are going to be hearing about today, from rack and part is their due deliberation and assessment of alternatives to this site. i really just before we get into that, i want to stress that our office is very supportive of the community has chosen. as the ultimate project proposal, that means a bigger clubhouse. we currently have a clubhouse that is 8300 square feet, by removing the flybridge which the hilton has been using for its private offense now for many years. we would be able to gain an additional 6700 square feet of programming space. i know that community is very

excited about that in particular. help for the elderly has had a lot of support and see by c has a lot of programming for seniors and they want to be able to meet with their chinese police officers and impact statements for victims that have been the victim of crimes and assault and the central police station has officers that have been doing really important to work to meet directly with constituents there. that really has been there public meeting house really. in addition, we are looking at other ways to activate that space and that additional 6,700-foot square foot of space is going to be essential to really ensuring that the community has space needs to do their own programming and have that be community led. finallynqñ?ñ?, i just want to st the backside of the part, which

you and many of you are familiar with it is just a funky design and we have people calling it brutalist. it is kind of not very well constructed to encourage public safety, to encourage this ability from the street, to encourage police and officers and part rangers to be able to see what's going on. we've had a lot of issues with encampments in this suit of weird areas on the back end. so certainly the ultimate project proposal is with a bridge or mobile is going to be very important to opening that space and to ensuring that the street side of the kearny street side of the park street and plaza is activated, transparent and it flows really nicely into the rest of the square. in fact, our office actually

funded a circulation study and at pedestrian safety and study around portsmouth square. this took a look at the garage entrance and how we can make that a better and safer for everyone ash?j#e8)a well as welt backside which is walter elam space. all of this really coming together hinges on the removal of the bridge and i just wanted to stress our strong support for the community's ultimate decision and what they would like to be doing going forward and i think rec and part for all of the hard work and i will now turn it over to kara ruppert. thank you so much. i will stick around as well if folks decide they have questions for our office or if they would like some more perspective. thank you so much. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you for joining us today.

>> thank you sunny, good afternoon commissioner'j/■ the m before you is the review of the comments and the review that will be drafted. as a reminder this item. [inaudible] this is an opportunity for the commissioners to provide their comments and recommendations. [inaudible] i'm joined today by making competent environmental ÷l in the projects side we have carol rupert, project manager represented san francisco rec and park department. before going into details on the internet i would like to turn the presentation over to kara who is going to give us a rundown on the status of it. i'm just going to share my screen. are you able to see the presentation?

okay thank you great. good afternoon commissioner's. >> good afternoon commissioners and thank you for the opportunity to share this exciting project today. [inaudible] and the project manager. [inaudible] i'm going to give a brief introduction to the existing site, the project and to share the community process and finished with the project next slide please. portsmouth square is a prominent space in chinatown in one of the oldest public spaces in san francisco. it is actually. [inaudible] is located on top of the portsmouth working garage. the current site in proposed

project both fond no one can start to see how it works on the site here showing the object no one under the bridge there. these constraints connection provide the. [inaudible] one of the biggest changes of this project is the. [inaudible] can sit here again the slide, you can see that it takes up out of the part. [inaudible] [inaudible] back to the proposed plan,. [inaudible] highlighting the program summit. i would. [inaudible] in the upper left-hand side

there and then. [inaudible] and then finally into the. [inaudible] we are planning for a larger multi use site that accommodates large events. the upper class also features a stage and it is a large city structure and on the eastern edge that provides gathering as well. next slide. the east of that structure is work there will be a grand staircase that connects to the lower level with their is more accessible things and. [inaudible] next slide both levels of the clubhouse have a direct, sorry, but will direct such as a

two-story structure built into the park terrace as well. the lower will you have large assembly area with restaurants in the upper level has. [inaudible] you can see how the clubhouse is a full and how different events and programs grew up on the site. next. the clubhouse is attached to the back of the garage there are garage elevators and is essentially. [inaudible] the elevators sent into an entry on the west side. next line piece. okay, i would like to share how we. [inaudible] this is project is the result of an outreach project. [inaudible] participatory design projects us. we began our work listening, specifically sitting during. [inaudible] we also interviewed.

[inaudible] [inaudible] we also did an online survey. we interviewed over 500 individuals for. next slide. so what feedback to beget here. the summary of questions such as to use the bridge? how do you like the part? what would you like in the clubhouse? guess people to share specific variants that have a negative associations with. on the left is. [inaudible] we have feedback areas and we continue to have the bridge. [inaudible] the clubhouse shows you gents out over and over feedback that we received. +

next up in the community outreach. [inaudible] this was developed with the community over the course of five meetings. given the design framework which. [inaudible] and then the final proposed, through this design development it is to ask questions to ensure. [inaudible] and on each turn we had a larger clubhouse and then. [inaudible] next slide. so, the project team wanted to develop project objectives that were. [inaudible] reorganizes objectives and categories that were specific to. [inaudible] categories. [inaudible] category one which. [inaudible]

two, the park renovation to the community. three, maximized our inclusion and facility use. next slide. for, to treat a safe and secure park and their safety. five,. [inaudible] and six,. [inaudible] needed to maintain. with that many introduction. and thank you so much. thank you kara. so, with reference to the project itself and the project site is located at 730 kearny

street, also noticed portsmouth square. along with 750 kearny street the this is on the border of chinatown in the financial district. the square is a public part with an parking garage underground which takes a full city block. so kearny street which is located at the southeast corner and kearny street. elevated kearny street bridge which then this is an active part in square providing direct access to the chinese culture center that is shown here. portman square is on a bilevel part with an garage. the parksvqñ?ñ? feature has parking elements, open space, landscape space and the building on site include the garage

facilitator, community center, and within the boundaries of the part are a number of monuments and sculptures that speak to the importance of the square and then to the square's historic use as to the . and next to the upper level of the part. person square was established in 1845 as part of the early development in san francisco. in early days the public project site function it is unofficial later gathering an official gathering space. was later ordered to the public square and then there was a school and then there was a new cl building. source was square is a site of celebrations. for example in 1846 the

end of mexican rule was announced at fourth was square park also served as the site for public in the discovery of gold in the no no odd in 18, the owner specially welcomed the chinese into san francisco with the ceremony hold portsmouth square. san francisco's earliest chinese population settled into the area in the part and became important space in 1961 the city of san francisco specifically altered this with a new completely redesigned square with the four-story underground. this of designzdñ?ñ?, the child this has served the chinatown community for more than a century today continues to provide public square

for its residents. portsmouth square is a site of many community sponsored events, demonstrations and activities. for these reasons we are excited and we would like this to be individually registered under california rule one,. [inaudible] additionally, portsmouth square is culturally significant as a community space and it serves its members and has served as members for more than a century. the spirit of significance extends from the establishment up to the present. the character design features of portsmouth square are its location and boundaries of the part, the large open spaces for public gathering and events and it general space for socializing for medium-size groups and a dedicated planning area

and six identified historical plaques, monuments and trashcan. directly east of portsmouth square is going to be kearny street which will be a three-story hotel which was built in 1971. building is made with primarily concrete is built on top a substantial frame. the north and south elevations. [inaudible] separated by vertical peers and epic concrete corners. an elevated pedestrian bridge would connect the building to portsmouth square and also serves as a different hotel entrance. on the corner is the chinese cultural center, this offers visitors space for other multifunctional spaces. [inaudible]

visitors may also access the chinese culture center. no one wanted in 1960, the city decided to relocate the hall of justice and anticipated it going to kearny the construction of the hotel. however the china -based community civil wright group insists for cisco readers and they lobbied that the board of supervisors needed to consider the to the chinatown community center. ultimately the city selected an investment group to construct the hotel with a community and cultural center. 1871 chinese wreck mentioned and completed theoxñ?ñ?ñ approval of the hotel. and also collaborated

with architecture or architect clement chan who completed the associated pestering bridge that. the chinese cultural center that opened in 1973 on the third floor of the hotel and feature dedicated space in part with celebration with chinese and chinese and american art, history and culture. the center was also designed as part of the larger hotel construction. 750 kearny street is individually eligible for listing under the california register under criterion one. it is significant under criterion one fourth association with the growing political strength of that chinatown community huef after more than a century of systemic racism and chinese sentiment successfully organized for additional resources for the community. the property is eligible under criteria three, architecture, as an exceptional example2ñ?ñ? of

their textural desire designed by mastersñ?ñ? architect clement chan. the period of significance under criterion one is from 1971 to 1973 and under three is 1971. the character defined features is something to increase and summarize this location and importance of the building along with the material forms that i have now talked about. concrete finish, concrete structural, along with the overall. [inaudible] additionally, the connection from 750 kearny street to portsmouth square would be an elevated pedestrian bridge is a character defining feature. the bridge functions as an entrance to the hotel and provides a dedicated entrance to the chinese culture center. in addition to the bridge as part of the form and development of

750 kearny street, staff also evaluated the bridge is independent topography. the bridge is a tieless stylistic and physical extension of the hotel and contains many of the same constructional forms of concrete. has going to have added concrete columns on each side of kearny street. the pedestrian walkway features sides topped with a concrete railing. this concrete ventures wine both sides of the walkway as to what the original geometric pictures of light. on the stairs to the east of the bridge provide independent access to the chinese cultural center located on the third floor of the hotel. in addition to establishing space for cultural center at 750 kearny street, the chinese culture center secured with the city's department of parks and the support of recreation and park department they were able to construct

elevated pedestrian bridge that is directly connecting the chinese culture center to portsmouth square. this dedicated entrance allows the hotel and culture center to have separate entries. the kearny street pedestrian bridge is individually eligible for this under the california register. like the hotel building, with the growing political power with chinatown in san francisco and the bridge is also significant because it's difficult and symbolic connection between the chinese culture center and the chinatown community. under criterion three the bridge is significant as a unique and representative example of the brutalist style and of career construction type of a pedestrian bridge. additionally the bridge is significant for its associate with master architect clement chen. the peer to significance under criterion one and

three is 1971 during its construction. basically, the characters of designs and features of the bridge are the forms and finishes associated with the brutalist style including reverse concrete construction along with structural orders. also, the actions of both portman square and the hotel tower are key features as it is and it is used as a future with the hotel. other character defining features include the closed railing with the concrete caps, and concrete interior walls. the exterior light fixtures, concrete benches and a dedicated intro to the chinese cultural center. moving on to talk briefly about the proposed project briefly, on the screen is a list of the project objectives that kara discussed in her presentation.

these are included but not limited to providing to the cultural setting, aligning with community input and creating safe and secure parking space. as karen noted, the proposed project would go with the existing part features with exists except other restrooms, elevator facilities, the parking garage. it also include removal of the pedestrian bridge. the proposed project would include all new landscaping, a new children's playground and fitnesswññ?ñ? area and a new clubhouse. to reference the former location of the pestering bridge the proposed project would incorporate park overlook on the south side of the new hub with the differentiated paving treatment. the kearny street pedestrian bridge would remove to the extent of the existing bridge support on the side of

the street. columns would remain in place to support the outdoor terrace area and exterior staircase. the bridge demolition would also result in numerous at 750 kearny street. the chinese cultural center would still be assessable from the lobby. what state guidelines, a range of alternative needs to be explored that confusedly accomplish most of the basic parts of the project as well as the void or substantially less then one of the significant effects of the project. as a reminder, the item before you does not require an approval action but it is an opportunity for the commissioners to provide their comments and recommendations requiring alternative presentation. along with this alternative project, the project sponsor and planning department have identified wonderful alternative and one partial preservation alternative.

although this was designed with the proposed park renovation it is com:c■ú÷ with the setting and character of portsmouth square, the proposed project will result in a significant and unavoidable impact to resources is loaded associated with the demolition of the kearny street bridge. in the mission to a significant unavoidable impact of the bridge itself, staff has determined the proposed project will cause a significant and unavoidable impact to the cultural significance of 750 kearny street under criterion one. mitigation developed to address impacts include plaque removal and relocation, interpretation and oral history, salvage and documentation of square resources. in preparing the preservation alternative, the department or project sponsor explored several different approaches to physically and symbolically receive the

connection had portman square and the chinese culture center. also while considering also site constraints, character defined features, sorry and project construction. staff considered structural limitations, my apologies. staff considered structural limitations associated with alteration or demolition of the bridge. specifically that the bridge has construction and it has partial or selective demolition of the bridge without significantly compromising the structural integrity of the bridge. additionally, alternatives that clearly convey physical and symbolic link of the bridge between chinatown and the chinese cultural center where confined to the boundaries of portsmouth square. because 750 kearny street is a privately

owned property and it is not a sponsor of this proposed project the ability and the reparation and permit to develop alternatives on or attached to private property was determined feasible. other projects and preservation alternatives were influenced by existing site conditions. for example, the garage entry stairs and elevator structure could not be relocated, which affected the design and footprint of the new clubhouse. it was also important to the project team to design a project that minimized or avoided structurally or operationally impacting the underground garage. additionally, the project sponsors determined and favored locating the new clubhouse in the northeast corner of the part so as to avoid unnecessary shadow within the parks station and avoid destruction of associate instructor with the rest rotten building and the rest of the part. the sponsors when it is on the clubhouse in a way that allowed easy

access to the clubhouse. the following comparison table highlights some of the key differences in the alternative, as they compare with post- project. as you can see, the full parcel preservation alternative in ■ñ?ñ? probate and has some of the same features of the proposed project, including playground footage, shade structure, to the plaza area. the proposed project in full preservation alternative would construct a clubhouse of similar size but partial preservation alternative would construct a smaller clubhouse. the other key difference is the status of the bridge. which would be retained into the full preservation alternative and demolished under both the proposed project and partial preservation alternative. under the full preservation alternative the part would be renovated in a way that will have the kearny street pedestrian bridge while setting but the south wall of the

proposed clubhouse by 15 feet. it will have 8,313 square feet to 6,051 square feet for the playground. a proposed 15-foot stairs would provide adequate space to the bridge in the clubhouse to take advantage of natural light by the southern wall of the clubhouse, while also conforming to fire and safety codes. under this alternative, new structural columns and transfer bands of the garage level will be required to structurally support the proposed clubhouse. this alternative would still allow for the substantial renovation of portsmouth square and in including the upper class a design and the children's playground. under the full preservation alternative, all of the characteristics and features of 750 kearny street in the past in bridge would be retained. furthermore, independent access to the chinese culture center, pedestrian bridge also be maintained and the full preservation

alternative means or partially meets the basic objective of this project. under the preservation alternative the full one, the part would be substantially the same as opposed project. it would be safe for the addition of any structure and certification are renovation of the bridge. the structures columns and overlaps with reference to the materials and style of the pedestrian bridge, without modifying the separate or design of the clubhouse of the proposed project. under this alternative, the new clubhouse and in response to design the playground of the proposed project would be attained. although, this alternative a symbolic interpretive connection between parts of the square in the chinese cultural center would be maintained. but the connection between the square in the center would be lost

resulting in unavoidable impact. the parcel preservation meets or partially meets the basic objectives of the project. that concludes my presentation, myself and my team are available for any questions you may have. thank you. thank you michelle and for the presentation. we should open us up to cut public comment. speak to members of the public this is your opportunity to speak to this matter by pushing * and then three to get into the queue. when you hear that your line has been under muted that is your indication to begin speaking. >> good afternoon, president matsuda and commissioners my name is alan lowe. i'm here speaking on behalf of the community for better parks and recreation is chinatown. commissioners this is a project that has taken over ten years and planning to complete.

that's ten years of expensive, extensive community engagement. this is partially funded by the funds from the transit district plan and states, we have spent over $2 million to get to this point in time. as the record part and staff have indicated, this has been extensively studied. in 2014, the complaining department engaged architects to perform a community needs assessment. those findings are what we all know. chinatown is the densest neighborhood west of new york. residents live in overcrowded conditions and the average median income in chinatown is 30%, which was one of the poorest neighborhoods in chinatown. our open space in portsmouth square are essential and are the living rooms for many of the residents in chinatown.

as wa and architects in 2016 and up to 2021, have conducted over 100 stakeholder meetings and this project and designed has been before you has gone through and over six community design workshops with over a hundred people in attendance at each workshop. this plan before you is the preferred design community and has been identified in 2018 by the recreation and park commission as a core project and is part of part of the 2020 part bond. the removal of the kearny street bridge will greatly expand community space as it has been indicated this will bring in additional 3,000 square foot of a community space for the community or for the community. this will be a resilient center, it will protect residents from extreme

heat, air quality and to be a early voting center for the residents. from urban design perspective this architectural brutalism has been an urban scar for many decades, to the community and interrupts the activation of kearny streetscape.ú■ñ?ñ?ñ removal of the bridge will bring activation and access to the;rñ?ñ? part and to the kearny and washington street corner. the strong support of the community supports the bridge. we recognize that private kearny street bridge is sometimes open to the public, sometimes close to the public and sometimes used for private events without any money to the city. from an urban design perspective, this is an opportunity to provide for the expansion of community serving space this far outweighs the utility of this bridge. for part and rec in chinatown we ask for your support for the

removal of the private kearny street bridge. thank you. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you, were going to ask public comment to be kept at two minutes. >> hello commissioners, my name is rosa and on behalf of chinatown community development center, we are in support of this decade-long making of the portsmouth square vision plan for a much-needed open and civic space and large indoor facility to chinatown. chinatown along with dozens of communities serve as organization of family associations have organized hundreds of community events each month at the living room of chinatown. attracting a diverse population of senior and family resident workers and visitors alike, including this friday's referent jesse jackson black and a api unity rally for social justice and anti- aa pai rally. however, there are many design programs and

complaints for years in regard to the current conditions have failed to meet the needs of chinatown and chinese community in the city. we are advocating a decade ago in 2010 towards the reimagining of the public square and its commercial edges. other community members who participated in this architecture and the 2016 swm vi community design process, this included one-to-one interviews. focus groups of tenants, merchants and community members, social workers and daily users as well as five large design workshops that were well attended with over 250 participants each. the engagement process was robust with community members commuting the needed frustration as well as anticipated incitement the long-overdue better part organization. planning free space and the community removal of a brutal invasive bridge from another era and building a basic large indoor facility that can serve as a resilient hub from systemic prevention to the central hosting cultural arts events.

most importantly, it will provide seniors and families healthy space for they can be sheltered from rain, winds, or bad air quality and smoky days on a daily basis with emerging climate change phenomenon. in summary, this project has fundamental necessity and design mitigation to design social and environmental justice in chinatown. our community has never had to make him a fresher, health and open space for granted and those injustices should be shown in the last year the pandemic and in extreme weather. thank you for your support for chinatown. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners, my name is maggie duncan and i am here to really reiterate some of the main points that cyc has sent in and support of the portsmouth square design with the removal of the bridge. cyc has been serving the community for over 50 years. they do currently are in

charge of the clubhouse at the playground which is very close by and as a organization that serves the community they know very well that portsmouth square is a very valuable space. that people use throughout the day and of course, with all of the historical significance, it is very important that the community have an input on what the design would look like. so, some of the main points for removing the bridge would be for establishing a larger clubhouse currently the clubhouse can only have so much capacity for eventss■ñ?ñ? and the community more indoor events it could be very impactful especially during time

as it has wildfires and bad air quality and as we know during coded portsmouth square has been vital in keeping the community connected to resources. on the second points, it would be a part that is well connected and us a site that is overall safe and welcoming environment.ké÷1■ also and proving the pedestrian walkway on kearny street, of course the front door of chinatown, it's very important to keep that safe and accessible. lastly allowing for more sunlight throughout the whole p? people feel comfortable going to such an impoñ?ñ?t space in chinatown. so, that is all from me. thank you for your time.

>> good afternoon, good afternoon commissioners. my name is annie chong and i am with the self-help for the elderly. self-help has been serving chinatown community since 1966. we have continuously appended to the needs of over 40,000 seniors in a year. since 2010, self-help rented the parks clubhouse in order to provide vital services to the seniors in chinatown. the part is really the icon and the heart of chinatown where the locals like us, referred to as the extended living room for thousands of seniors, families and children who live in the buildings around chinatown. every one of our residents need more open and recreational spaces in chinatown. it is critical that the renovation and rebuild of apartment square include a large interspace to serve all of the needs of the community. we need a flexible space

as a gathering place, wellness center, a recreational center and in an event community venue. also, a respite center for days like this which are very, very hot outside. to achieve this goal, the bridge has to come down. since it was built, the bridges cast a shadow on the part as well as on the clubhouse. the last relocation of the clubhouse to the underbelly of the bridge was a failed measure. this was to create more safety and environment for our seniors and our children. so please, the will of the community to remove the bridge and to create a large indoor community space has to be honored and respected. we spent over ten years and planning and fighting for the rebuilding part and forces square. when your support support to this plan forward. thank you.

>> that after two and my name is lillian and i am the district youth commissioner. i will be writing a letter on behalf of the community tenants association. it is a part of the new design of portsmouth square, which is the product of hundreds of community members opinions on numerous community meetings. pta has a membership of over 2500 residents, most of whom are low income seniors living in chinatown. the fourth of our active members are as part in hotels and many of them but of course must wear everyday to, make friends and enjoy sunlight. in the last seven years we have been actively engaged in the community process to inform the constructional plan for a much needed improvement to portsmouth square. the results and conceptual plan has been embraced by the countless part users who offered their heartfelt request. the removal of the bridge is a key aspect of the design it is significant benefits for the part in the community. it allows for asañ?ñ larger

clubhouse8■ñ?ñ?ñ giving this community and much needed space for indoor events and it allows for better connections across the site. we went one large connected part, rather than the multiple spaces that they have now. it will create a better street experience on kearny, which is the front door on chinatown. it allows for sunlight and the ability of the whole part, providing a safe space for seniors and families to hang out. we love the new design with a large indoor clubhouse facility and select area. it creates a much needed multipurpose facility for itsúñ?ñ? community that needs space and the design opens for a lower area to fresh air with health asaiñ?ñ? a round out the pandemic year. we ask you to support the new design with us and create the best living room together for our community. thank you. >> great afternoon and thank you commissioners my name is sarah hsu and i'm with bright line

defense, todáñ?ñ? nonprofits that works on air quality, food insecurity, part and workforce development issues in san francisco. we assisted with the removal of the pedestrian bridge and kearny street. it's an important project for the community and for other removal of the bridge because it's a community lead in the community identified project or through extensive community engagement processes. chinatown is densely populated in portsmouth square is crucial for the community during the removal of the bridge the recreation space green space and indoor space for the community in the community resilience hub. the space could be used to provide and address. when environmental health concerns by saving as centers during extreme heat events like today. it can provide space for community members doing fires and with poor air quality events. catastrophic climate change, this proportionately and negatively impacts our

most vulnerable communities and greater resources are needed for chinatown residents to come back to the climate impact of further environmental justice. the removal of the pedestrian bridge is the step in the right direction. thank you. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] members the public, less call for comment on this matter publicly. you need to press * and then three. okay commissioners, seeing no additional request to speak for members of the public, public comment on this matter is now closed. it is now before you for your review and comment. >> [chris foley] i live very close to the spark and i spend a lot of time walking to the part and i see the part and all of the people that use on a daily basis. i agree that that bridge is not only an eyesore

but is actually holding back the ability for the community together and actually have enough space for them to enjoy life. i also would like to mention that commissioner lowe did call me earlier today and he did inform me that he was going to be on this and talking at this hearing and i have known commissioner lowe for a long time so i did want to mention that for part of the record. i think that the bridge as an eyesore and i think that the committee work they have done for the past ten years is incredible and i am very motivated to approve this. thank you. >> [diane matsuda, president]. commissioner perlman. >> [johnathan pearlman] thank you and i think that the work that has been done is incredibly impressive. i worked on a project that unfortunately never came to fruition, self-help for the elderly and it was right

across the street on washington street from portsmouth square. so, i did spend a lot of time there and i did come in and out of the garage. so, i am quite familiar with it and you know i am a big fan of brutalism, but there is lots of things that have been done in the past that don't make them good bridges of them self are not part of the urban san francisco, except maybe at the embarcadero center which is of the same timeframe and brutalist style of this hotel and bridge bridges are naturally part of the fabric of san francisco is a thing architecturally it is rather ordinary and it is ordinarily it is not an exquisite piece that we would lose if it were

gone. i think most people as public comment have applied this has been an eyesore and it's been really detriment to the use. obviously, the whole pointt÷ñ?ñ?z the use of the public. this plan seems to be extremely it's will put together i would very much support the loss of the bridge to enable such a fine and i think the historical connection is one of the most important pieces p. the place where san francisco essentially started. it was the it was the town center when the city started in allowing this project to move

forward as designed, would make it a very significant and it is already heavily used part but it would make it an extremely beneficial addition to the community by having by having a larger clubhouse as well as larger play area and and it's much more pleasant i think this is quite remarkable and an amazing example of community with the creation of place that in itself to be historically marked but i think this is a great project. >> if i made japan, thank you commissioners and i really appreciate everybody's support for this amazing project. your comments have been

really great and if you have any comments on the alternative. i appreciate everyone's positivity about the part but if you can provide your comments, thank you. >> you are playing the role that andrew will soon used to play, that would get us back on track quickly so thank you for that. i appreciate that. i will just quickly comment then that i do think the, it would be nice to see other alternatives but basically the alternatives are no bridge leave the bridge or have a partial piece of bridge. so therefore those three alternatives so therefore the other two alternatives are appropriate. what i think they do fulfill the requirements for the project alternative for this.

>> [diane matsuda, president] commissioner johns. >> [richard s.e. johns] thank you. ms. taylor, preempted what i was going to say i would like to comments that i totally support what commissioner perlman said at the end of his remarks i think the alternative have been adequately addressed and i don't see that there is anything else that is a possibility and so i think that we have done our job as we have passed this higher up the chain. thank you. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you, commissioner so. >> [michelle taylor] sorry i have done it

myself. i am very connected and personally also to architecturally with chinatown in the community. seeing my daughter and also participating with her alongside the annual chinese new year parade we have inevitably had to go underneath the pedestrian footbridge. it always makes me wonder, we always wonder is there any better way to see the parade without having to actually pay through the noes to private sponsors and actually that is something that the general public could enjoy it. i am just so happy and thrilled to see that there is a really big community center that is going to be right there and right in the corner. that will allow everyone to access and to build a chinese new year parade and i'm also expecting there also be a lot more festival and seasoning and holiday celebration in there.

i really love the proposed project and it really tries to solve a lot of issues that we have to face in chinatown with systematic and systemic racism, the crime that we have to endure throughout the years and getting more violence. and it is a very difficult design ever and that also to get the entire community i just love the proposed projects it would solve a lot of issues both alternatives are pretty good and i would love to prefer to have the larger clubhouse. because right now in chinatown you really

can't have, or we just lose community basis for people who live in chinatown that we can gatherv[ñ?ñ? together to share information and also to get to know each other better. i am all supportive of bats without the bridge being in there. mainly it's for security reasons. there are so many incidences that happen but don't need to repeat. it is actually years and even before coed that we have seen our citizens and been brutally attacked during daylight around that particular area. any design that we can that we can endorse to present and discourage danger and crime from happening that would be my key focus with regard to the work the

architecture history for that type of architecture in my scene like and it sounds kind of like extreme but that was kind of how the historians combated that style. it's nothing different than a victorian-style, then it might translate and it sounds kind of rough and bruised but denied not be everybody's favorite style. in that particular example this is back in the 1700s and that is the key poster child for that. in that report it's really emphasize the character defining peach feature dividing the historical architectural design feature and with that i would love to see you have an interpretive learning experience in the playground are

actually after which it will be down the bridge and we can still show a legacy of the story why it was there. it was there because we were anticipating the center would be there. it's more like a civic architecture it was a style design of the speck in the 70s. it will be nice to actually incorporate this into the right era so it could then sell my child or her children later$lñ?ñ? on will be able to see this in what used to look like but hey, this is really cool now. we actually get to get together with the community use the can feel safe and be together there and really the heart of chinatown to be more unified and welcome and most importantly safe. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you

commissioner nageswaran. >> [ruchira nageswaran] i'm going to try to go from historical perspective and hopefully tieback to the alternative somehow. what i kind of read through the information and looking out the sites and looking at the drawing, it is interesting to me it is such a challenge with the pedestrian bridge. trying to think myself are thinking to myself it what is so challenging? i think we are at this borderline between financial districts in chinatown and looking at, was it called, the chinatown local standard, the area planned. the chinatown area plan i was looking at looking at the characteristics

of the low-lying area with the rhythm of the façade and demonstration and then across the street is the financial district with infinitely high buildings and certainly the brutalist building was a transamerica building and embarcadero center. and then there was this bridge and looking at the historical studies and summary of that the bridge itself, i can see that the tower and the bridge are of cohesive design. they have the same sort of significances. and i would not separate them and make the bridge a separate individual eligible entity. only because without the tower, it has no

meaning. so and that respect i was surprised that it was individually eligible. and then, on the other hand, portsmouth square is a contributing feature of the chinatown area and in 1961, of course, it was white clean for think the parking garage. which i am sure was a necessity at that time. and so, what is there now was a change from may be 100 years ago, but time changes and needs change all of that. so looking at portsmouth square you kind of think well, if that is for chinatown and the scale of chinatown is a certain scale. it is quite the behemoth pedestrian bridge, it is kind of out of place so a lot of respects it is

incompatible with the chinatown historic district. the eligible district and at the same

that dichotomy. and then on the other hand if you are removing the bridge and keeping remanence of it it is sort of a disconnect between the two again and you are trying to piecemeal again whatever you had. i am not totally satisfied with the alternative. i certainly agree with my fellow commissioners on removing the bridge and having them stand on their own as entities and part of their own context. and you know, those are the things that i think about. as far as the design for portsmouth square, i hope that there is some also reference to the chinatown characteristics as well.

i know that it's barely a modern design and therefore there are things that need to be pushed forward. but any sort of reference to that chinatown sort of feel and connection with, for me, would make it of more im in chinatown and i have a connection with this area now. where as now, i don't see a connection with 100 years ago and i don't see connection with chinatown now. i would like to see more of that. so, those are my comments into thank you. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you. i totally support commissioner nageswaran, particularly about the connection, the long connection, the historical connection that the chinese community has with this particular place. there are very few sites

in the city and entirely of san francisco that really honor and respect the api community and the chinese community is one of the oldest communities here. i would like to see more of that connection. i just wanted to confirm michelle, that the community, ten years is a long time. i thoroughly respect and commend all of those people who went to that process. because i have gone in that it is not funded. i think that the recommendations of the decision that was made was not an easy one to come to. i just want to make sure that the community is fully aware of these preservation alternatives and that they were also able to comment. is that correct? >> [michelle taylor] the preservation alternatives, are being shar0xñ?ñ?ed with the commission and will be included inh?ñ? the draft. so, for this

commission's request we bring it to you before we publish it in the draft dir as to whether they are adequate, appropriate and they will be in the draft dir and available for public comment. this is when the dir is published. >> [diane matsuda, president] as well as the comments are made today particularly on the accuracy of the alternative? >> [michelle taylor] in its entirety. >> [diane matsuda, president] i also want to comment about the commissioners comments about demonstrating an emotional connection, the historical connection of the chinese community with this place. >> [michelle taylor] i do have a question about that i suppose. maybe i will ask justin to come on if he is available. because the alternatives are really focused on the bridge, because that is where the significant and unavoidable impact

is. i want to clarify that the)wñ?ñ? request for the alternatives would be that the bridge correlates of better, if as opposed to the full restoration alternative to retain the bridge, would correlate better with the new design of the part in some way. but i am not sure if i can speak to the design of the part as part of that alternative process. justin can you speak to that a little? >> yes i think that the purpose of this presentation is to bring preservation alternatives to the historic preservation commission to get their thoughts on the adequacy of altering specifically at this point and venue alternatives should be

modified as they have been incorporated within the draft. which is unpublished and it is at that point that the community would be able to provide their input, this is just one of the beginning phases. so, the draft will come back to the preservation commission for their ñ?ñ?ñ point that i believe public comment would be taken and then this would be taken into consideration more formally. and theõ■ the draft goes to the planning commission for a hearing before it's published. so there are two additional points for even certified which is public comment and is taken then most formally. this was the draft preservation which would be before the hpc and

this would be kind of more of an informal review we do appreciate the fact that it is important to get public comment as much as possible but that just to say that that is just more of an informal to get something agreed-upon. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you for the explanation justin, michelle to hold that thought i do appreciate the explanation of the process, but one kind of comment that i have is that usually we are allowed to make comments on draft eir or whatever stage that it is in and evening with the initial discussion. talking about community andy]ñ?ñ? talking about a particular communityuwñ?ñ?ñ of caller is always an afterthought. and i no longer want to make it an afterthought any longer.

i want to make it as an integral part of this project and this is portsmouth square. portsmouth square is of course chinatown and i don't want to see the disconnect to that. so, if we can make sure that is a part of any kind of conversation about this particular project overall, i would like to see that. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner, if i may commissioner black is supposed to see. >> [diane matsuda, president] i don't see her on a chat, >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] she keeps sending it to me and said of everyone so that's why i'm letting you know. >> [kate black] that is obviously my fault and i apologize. i did feel a little left out but i do appreciate and i do want to start by saying i do appreciate the opportunity that we do get to comment early in the eir process. as a full commission and it was harder on staff and probably even the project but it does help us as a body to put our

comments forward that could be useful in the community process and in the community responses. you know it's unusual because often we are evaluating the preservation alternatives from an impact of scale. from full scale down to partial scale down to no contact. and in this case we don't really agree completely with commissioner pearlman, this is really sort of all or nothing. you cannot have half a bridge it really does not achieve anything and so that is kind of what we are looking at. yes, i think the alternatives have beenr÷ñ?ñ evaluated properly i want to also say that i am a big fan of brutalist architecture, including this building and the bridge. i don't see it as an eyesore. i do see it though and while i typically appreciate my change to

buildings like this i think my fellow commissioners have made some very persuasive comments about community engagements, comments from the commissioners about bridge not really being common. a bridge like this being common to the urgent urban concept and i just wanted to comment about its visual and physical relationship to the scale of chinatown. i think is all really valuable and i hope that they do get considered as part of the draft eir and communicated further. to be honest, i don't think the architecture of the very well-designed 750 carney will softer much at all from the removal of the bridge. the building has a huge presence by itself by

the nature of its construction and design. it is really has a huge presence. that bridge is really more visible at the pedestrian scale on kearny street and i don't think it will harm the building significantly to remove it. following also, based on extensive community input and this is an incredibly important site in san francisco's history. not only in general, but especially to the chinese community who has been congregating here since the 1850s. it appears that the bridge does not provide any benefit that the community continues to desire and apparently it has some public safety concerns. i/mñ?ñ? am thinking that the and i wish toy÷ñ?ñ? state that i think the alternatives are adequate, especially

as given the context of some of the commissioner comments today. i believe we were asked about our opinions on which preservation alternative we generally preferred. in this case, i think that the project alternative the preferable one. >> [diane matsuda, president]. thank you. any other commissioners interested in making any further or final comments? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioners that was causing speak. >> [diane matsuda, president] commissioner snow. >> [linda so] i like to clarify one thing in the comparison table that was shared was by michelle. the reference of the clubhouse is it actually, is it less than the full preservation alternative? because right now it actually,qñ?ñ? shows that the full preservation

alternative has the exact same 8,313 square foot of clubhouse area is the proposed project. so is that a typo that needs to be flipped? >> [michelle taylor] it is. so the partial preservation alternative would retain the clubhouse similar to the proposed project. the full preservation alternative would remain a reduction in the square footage because of that and i apologize for the typo. >> [linda so] okay that's fine. it was a 25% difference. that's okay that's good that is how i am seeing things anyway. so, i do because they clarifying with me i agree with commissioner erisa there's no better way to keep half bridge. it is irrelevant and

especially it's not giving us the contextual history that is relevant. so i am for the proposed project with regard to also having a interpretive learning exhibits type of display in the new portsmouth square to show that the history of the significant building and there influence to the history of chinatown. but i think everyone to be fully supportive of this this is exciting and i look forward to have a really safe place to enjoy time chinatown and not having to worry about having to go over under the shadow of any bridges. it is been a challenge for us all. i am actually recommending the proposed project to move

forward. i don't see the partial preservation alternative and sustainable without to much drastically reduced clubhouse and also with a residual partial bridge that actually could be also, will first is no longer really that relevant and still is not solving the issues of security and safety. this is for the future of chinatown. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you. are there any other further comments? are there any further comments to share with michelle so this is an opportunity, right to correct? for us to share our comments for you to incorporate in forward them along? >> [michelle taylor]. that is right. >> [diane matsuda, president]. i don't see any other requests to speak in the chat, so i think that this provide you with enough information? >> [michelle taylor]. yes, this is been helpful. thankful.

>> [diane matsuda, president] great. thankful. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] excellent, commissioners that will conclude this item and we can move on to your final agenda item, number five for case number 2020-0059 pta at 233 gary street to permit the altar that was removed from your consent, i am sorry i mean i'm reading an item proposed for continuance. item number seven that was removed from consent for case number 2015-001033 coh-2948 battery street certificate of appropriateness. stephanie prepared to make your presentation? >> yes >> [jonasgñ?ñ? p. ionin, commission secretary] let me make you the presenter.

>> good afternoon commissioners i am rebecca delgado staff before you with a request to extend the expiration date of the motion am 03454 certificate of appropriateness at 940 battery street located on the east side of battery street between main street in the streets. the property is located between article ten waterford market strips. the property was initially constructed as a two-story building in 1917 and received a third story in 1938. the proposal was approved at an hpc hearing on august 1st 2018. the project approved under that motion had rendered no changes since that time and is returning to hpc solely to seek an extension of the expiration date of the original motion. the previously approved work included interior and exterior alteration in support of a change of use from a commercial and industrial space to a museum. including modification to window and door openings of the ground floor on the battery street façade,

rehabilitation of the remaining historic windows at the first and first floors and the inclusion of non- historical aluminum windows at the second floor with window smashing the historic windows. construction of the one-story addition and the creation of to cover back terraces of the third and fourth floors of the elevation and interior allegations on all fours of the building, including the removal of the existing third floor and the insertion of two new floor plates to include a new third and fourth floor. staff recommendations for this project is for approval with conditions. staff recommends one conditional of approval carried over from the original approved motion for planning staff to review and approve and shelter for any multilayered windows of the battery street façade. the department has received public correspondence from five individuals expressing this project and 18 individuals in support of the project.

since this was published for the project, minor corrections were made to pay china draft and in the motion in connection with language discussing the final medicated neck of the project and for the finalized in 2019. due to corrections that were afforded to the commission prior to the hearing. this conclude my prostitution was for any questions. and the project sulfur also has a brief presentation of the project. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary]. project sponsor you five minutes. >> thank you jonas, this is larry bednar good afternoon commissioners representing rose with holly on americano. you say it is a nonprofit museum that is charged with telling the history of our of the san francisco italian-american community. with me today is mark's coupon so with the mazzeo, christopher augusta with marc avenue architects, we are here

to request a three to five-year extension of approval. the hpsc approved the project on, six to zero, on august 1st, 2018. at that time the surrounding tenets of property owners were notice is required. $1 million has been invested in the project and systemic shutdown, fundraising as you can imagine, you might know that the planning commission and the approval language allows the zoning administrator to extend approvals during the pandemic period. unfortunately, the hpc approvals do not grant this power. thus this is why we are before you and while we have spent to some extent, some time to come before you just for a technicality. at this point, i would like to turn it over to christopher augusta, the architects to present the project if the commission pleases. >> thank you larry thank

you commissioners. you can go to the next life. as rebecca said, 940 battery is on the east side of battery street between vallejo and green street on the northeast waterfront district. i will try to go through this quickly because we have limited time. you could go to the next slide. 940 battery street in the middle of the image, as rebecca mentioned, this is an originally two-story building was built in 1917 and you can see the third story addition of the building on 1938. the building is a concrete frame and the exterior walls of the building are concrete. the interior is all heavy timber. in the photograph you can see the original historical windows on the third floor and you can see second for windows as were mentioned are not historical. you can go to the next light.

this shows an existing and proposed section looking south. battery street is on the right side of this image and on the left you can see the existing three story structure with the top third floor being the addition. on the right you can see the proposed section with the ground or ground level floor plate and the second floor floor plate remaining6yñ?ñ substantially as they are. along the third for or ñ?ñ? roof the structure has been removed and replaced with new construction inside the existing shell. the fourth story has been added and the penthouses been added on top of the existing structure. the diagonal line as you see on the far right, represents the view of

the sites line i should say, a pedestrian standing all the way across battery street and demonstrates the new construction on the roof will not be visible from that position. you can take me to the next slide. battery street façade is the only frontage on the building. on the left you can see the existing façade, on the right you see the new construction above the roof line and you can just see the ground floor being opened up front and area which allows some greater transparency and visibility into the ground floor from the sidewalk. you can also see on the far left of the proposed façade a new exit door

and you can probably just see the as rebecca mentioned, the small white windows have been replaced in the second floor to historical accuracy. and you can go to the next slide. on the upper left you can see a birds eye view showing the new construction and colors and to the existing shell of the building and gray. and going counterclockwise, look into the lower left and demonstrates what we saw in this section is what no new construction is visible from immediately across the street and the new construction on the roof is barely visible as you go all the way north to south on the block. the existing shell of the building is dark gray and remains as is. next slide. i woke up with the plans in detail because we are

out of time but the major part of this project includes new exit stairs in a new elevator. i believe it right there, you can flip to the last page of, there is a rendering right there that gives you an idea of the open front door providing visibility from the street. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you, that does conclude your presentation time commissioners might have additional questions for you later. this time we should open up to public comment and public this is your opportunity to address the commission on this matter by pushing * and then three. you have two minutes.hnñ?ñ? >> hello. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] yes go ahead. >> hi i actually wanted to start off my comments, there is an article that i was reading and it says that they want to move the building to battery.

they work on green state what's runs perpendicular to battery. he mentions that he wants to move the spot here because it's up-and-coming and there are a bunch of video and creative businesses around. my concern is that this building, the construction of this building will affect our business, which is already been greatly affected by covid. and at the end of the day, we ask i personally asked, that we are included in this construction scheduling. especially considering the foundation work in particular. it will be very important that we are involved in that if we do this work. good for us. i also was i'm sure i need to propose my question there has been

a ton of free permitting around here as far as restaurants picking up parking spots and the proposal saying that they want to take out the parking for bike racks, even though they are going to have bike racks in the basements, things like that. and then finally, something that i gathered from the meeting today is that there was a comment made about shortening a word on the building. i studied music so there is some context that and it is an interesting argument to have. and in considering an ' in a word versus adding a whole post, the building is not a museum so this is another interesting aspect of all of this to me personally. so again, we would like to be considered in the scheduling as far as noise goes because we will lose business. inevitably, that is to

be considered as low as wondering if this proposal needs to be resubmitted? that's not really my place to say. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you, that is your time. thank you. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] go ahead and call her when you hear that your line is unneeded that is your indication to be in speaking. >> good afternoon commissioners and thank you so much for giving me.mzñ?ñ? [inaudible] which is a 29 -year-old television broadcast company we are located at 950 battery street, which is directly next door to the proposed project at 940. i purchased this on april 1st, 2019 and since i have sent in over $1 million integrating all the equipment and technology. unfortunately, the previous owner was very ill at the time of the first hpc hearing which took place on august 1st, 2019 and

none of us here as tenants now knew of this project next door. just proposed we feel will be catastrophic for our businesses and could result in us losing income for many months. possibly closing is down permanently and as i stated, as a 29 -year-old television company and to hear from her other neighbors it's hard for them as well. beyond this as well it's a 24 hour day, seven day week news agency in france of professional television sounds to the stage. we hope to guests that are both by national and international news network such as cnn, nbc, fox, eurovision et cetera. these networks have complete confidence in us to provide them with high end quality transmission. the new cycle, as you can imagine, it's impossible to predict and we often get request as soon as they arrive know know what.

[inaudible] is a lot of noise noise annoyed i'm sorry. speaker pelosi herself is in our studio frequently at least once a month and relies on us to be her point of communication. i am sure that i can get a letter of support from the us house of representatives. in opposed covid in san francisco we are now one of two such stages the others all closed down. during covid we served the bay area during live streams in our place to do better work than ever. but we would need silence. we have made reasonable installations in our soundproofing and this is our normal place of business. i can see that out of time it would be very impossible for us to block out the level of intrusion that we could expect from this project and i hope that there is a path forward. that would allow us to be able to continue. >> [jonas p. ionin,

commission secretary]. that is your time. hello can you hear me? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] guess we can. >> terrific, my name is kelly lorenz and i am anyrñ?ñ? employee in san francisco which is next door to the proposed site. i have also been a client of beyond pics since 1994. during the time that the museum was submitting its plans i was working at the bayshore stage, which beyond pics owned and i had not heard anything about the museum plans at all. i think that one of the things that you have to look at in this region is that historically this whole section of town was called media goal. that was in the 1990s, that was because of all the television stations that are here and it is also a respite for a lot of bad or i'm sorry advertising agencies and firms. it is all media centric and what i have seen and i have worked in broadcast media

relations and relied on to beyond pics through the decade of the '90s and the lot to provide broadcast services which often times did a great deal of pr for san francisco nationally and internationally. and added to the appeal of the city and what has amongst his tourist trade. there is a soundstage that has an adjacent wall to the building, so we will be be put out of business using the soundstage if there is noise in the foundation. there is also to broadcast inserts studios that are relied on by international networks and also national networks for live shots for people like mayor of london breed. and we will a very active good citizen of san francisco. but you are going to be put us out of business if there's there is no noise abatement. i have been to the museum, i loathes the museum they are great.

i'm not a complaint about that it's a wonderful place in fort mason has a very small footprint some kind of curious about the expansive need or why they expensive need for the building? i was not present at the previous submissions but. thank you for hearing me out. >> hello, commissioners thank you for allowing me to speak. my name is kim salyer, i am the managing partner of a film and video postproduction company called caller a go go and we are on the second floor at 950 battery. many of our many of our rooms are adjacent to the north wall of 940 will be undergoing

construction and like everybody else that is nearby, we are very concerned about the impact that it will have on our business. we have clients working in an on-site and have that and that depends on a quiet environment that you can see and hear and the work that they are doing. i have been in this building since 2014 and certainly i have never heard or got any collect kind of notice in 2018 about this project. i'm also a fan of the museum and i love art of all kinds. that is great but really scary for us and we have

a large investment in our facilities and we would not easily be able to walk away and go somewhere else. please consider finding a way for us to have some say in this and get a resolution that allows us to stay in business. thank you for your time. >> high commissioners and thank you very much for your time today, my name is scott peterson and i also work with beyond sfs operation manager to reinforce what we share a full wall with the 940 battery street in our current location. all of our studios have been inextricably elected to that property and space in the scope of work that is being proposed there really seems to be no way to move forward without making some major

changes to sound abatement that are financially unfeasible. as our owner has artie pointed out, the investments of a million dollars that on behalf of the museum are well, understandably, a good sound investments within the broadcast facilities interstate facilities here are foreign exceeding that. our permanent installation to our structure here cannot be relocated. essentially the problems that would occur as a result of the sound intrusion of this commercial project would be catastrophic to not just our business, but but the business on the floor below us caller a floor beñ? and as well as the adjacent to sound students are at 69 green street, which share common patio with our upper floor. i ask that you reconsider the ramifications of this and that it would put

potentially permanently a long-standing businesses completely out of work in a time when we are already trying to recover from the most occult financial year in any of our recent memories for certain. we are trying tozññ?ñ? bounce back from covid as it is and that would be a blow that to be could potentially never recover from and it would be disastrous to not only ourselves but the film and the community of san francisco as a whole. i know that this being historic media goals, most of our businesses have been centered around her historically. this is something that we would never get over from. >> hi, name is patrick fitzgerald on a represent the tenant at 69 green street. we are an audio recording studio that has been here since 1986. we have been running happily because we are

saying this is media goals, be located here to be close television studios and the other media facilities and advertising agencies. we are also very concerned about the acoustic trespass of this process prof project would impose on our business. we share a kitty corner connection with 940 battery on the northeast corner of their building. escott just mentioned, we share adjoining walls with 950 battery any structural vibration that happens these buildings, because they are joined to a shared walls, transfers from one building to another. and although, be professionally built studios that are acoustically isolated to professional standards anything that rings the structure of the building is not something that we can keep of the morning. we are very concerned this construction+■ñ?ñ? will

disrupt our business and perhaps an hour business because escott also mentioned, we are coming out of an extremely difficultqsñ?ñ financial time and any further nail in the coffin might just be the one that sealed shut. thank you for your time. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you for comment last call on the you need to press * than three seeing no additional request to speak for members of the public i take it back, there is one more person requesting to speak, you have two minutes. >> hello can you hear me? >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] yes began. >> okay sorry. hi my name is lynn moore and i am the building manager 950 battery street and i just want

to make a comment during covid we have already lost so many tenants that we are just barely surviving and there is no way that we can afford to lose beyond pics and caller a go-go and all of our production and advertising tenants at 950 battery street. it would totally vacate the entire building. i am requesting that all of the noise and in the construction it goes on next door be mitigated with the tenants at battery and green. it's all i have to say. thank you. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] okay commissioners, that concludes public comments for this matter and it is now before you. commissioner matsuda i apologize as another quest to speak. >> [diane matsuda, president] >> hello, this is packer and i represent the

owner of 900 battery street. we believe that the approval of the certificate ofqéñ?ñ?ñ? appropriateness at the 2018 hearing, should be re- consist reconsidered because it was approved on an adequate presentation. 940 battery street is a part of the same building as 900 battery street, both were built as a single structure and in fact, 940 battery street comprises less than 25% of the existing structure. so, we are really talking about tails wagging dogs and we are requesting a continuance of this hearing so that the project sponsor can

properly present the project in the context of the whole building0÷ñ?ñ? of which there project is parked. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] okay commissioners, public comment disclosed and it is now up for your consideration. >> [diane matsuda, president]. thank you jonas. commissioner foley? >> [chris foley] i actually know and have met the owner of 900 battery and i know mister hacker well. that building has been vacant almost 30 years. the sound studio people i think they are an important part of the fabric of the communitygfñ?ñ? and the developer representative called me

yesterday, mister battier and he had a short conversation with me and i said to him, who is your contractor? they have an excellent contractor named oliver company. i have faith that both the contractor and the project sponsor and that people here will be able to work together. i think that this museum is in the community. thank >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you, commissioner johns. >> [richard s.e. johns] thank you and this is an interesting thing. i remember when it came before us the last time and some of these same arguments were made. i don't want to be a difficult person here but what is before us is the question as i see it, essentially it is, does the work that is proposed comply with article ten of the planning code and the

secretary of interior standards? that i think is that the limits what we can properly consider. if you go through the staffd9ñ?ñ?ñ report i think they have done a very good job of analyzing this and concluding that there is compliance with article ten and the sector and will continue your interior standards and him as a matter of fact there really was not much of a question. now today i think what we are really confronted with is should the period of time within which this work is to be done extended? i have not heard an argument or anybody address why it shouldn't be extended. a lot of people want to relitigate the earlier hearing but i don't know that there is any basis for us to reconsider

what we've already gone through. so in light of those things and the pretty paper clear compliance with article ten and a sector of interior standards, i would be in in favor of granting the west. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you, jonas, we have just been informed that we have another number or member of the public that will want to make comments and i will ask that person to make the public comment at this time. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you commissioner, in fact there are two people requesting to speak but it may appear as though some of his people and may have already spoken so that is the case i will leave them and you don't speak twice. >> in mid-may in response we have to go ahead caller >> [jonas

p. ionin, commission secretary] go ahead caller okay may be that person has decided not to talk. because if they have all ready spoken then my apologize for the interruption >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you. commissioner pearlman. >> [johnathan pearlman] this is one of these cases where all of these issues are planning commission issues and they are not in the purview of the historic commission. i do want to just say one small thing which is based on the complaints of the callers basically know building would ever be able to be built in this city because of it and i also want to concur with commissioner only. i have worked with steve oliver of oliver and company on mejia projects he is one of the finest contractors and it seems to me

that working with the contractor and the neighbors that there are many ways to achieve temporary provisions so that these businesses won't go out of business. again, this is temporary and were not talking about the operation of the new sale, were talking about the construction. and the only way to get buildings built is to build them. so i just think that this is as commissioner johns said, is fully compliant and it is barely a technicality that our motion in 2018, did not include the phrase zoning administrator can extend. so, for that reason i see no reason to not approve this project. thank you. >> [diane matsuda, president]. thank you and are there any other commissioners

he would like to make comments? or have any questions for staff? commissioneryñ?ñ? black. >> [kate black]. hi, i always nice when there a sort of conflict between project component and adjacent property owners. i know personally how difficult it is to exist next to full-scale construction. i really appreciate the comments from commissioners foley and pearlman about actual contractor involved here. i am not familiar with them so i appreciate that. and to i completely concur with my very clear thinking commissioners that these issues are beyond the scope of the criteria that is available to us under the historic preservation commission it is really more appropriate for planning

commission and so therefore, i was in support of the project when it was first approved and i continue to support the project approval now. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you and another comments from the commission? is there a motion? >> i also make the motion to approve the extension as requested. >> second >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] thank you commissioners and saying no additional request to speak from commissioners of the motion that has been to approve the request met him motion commissioner whistler. to be sworn. commissioner black >> [kate black] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commission fully >> [chris foley] >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner foley, commissioner foley may be routed.

, commissioner foley have technical difficulties. commissioner john >> [richard s.e. johns] yes >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] commissioner earl roman? >> [johnathan pearlman] yes commissioner president >> [diane matsuda, president]? >> [diane matsuda, president] yes so this motion passes unanimously 620. commissioners that includes your agenda today. >> [jonas p. ionin, commission secretary] was a pleasure seeing all of you it seems like it's been about a month. so thank you. >> [diane matsuda, president] thank you everyone

>> after my fire in my apartment and losing everything, the red cross gave us a list of agencies in the city to reach out to and i signed up for the below-market rate program. i got my certificate and started applying and won the housing lottery. [♪♪♪] >> the current lottery program began in 2016. but there have been lot rows that have happened for affordable housing in the city for much longer than that.

it was -- there was no standard practice. for non-profit organizations that were providing affordable housing with low in the city, they all did their lotteries on their own. private developers that include in their buildings affordable units, those are the city we've been monitoring for some time since 1992. we did it with something like this. where people were given circus tickets. we game into 291st century in 2016 and started doing electronic lotteries. at the same time, we started electronic applications systems. called dalia. the lottery is completely free. you can apply two ways. you can submit a paper application, which you can download from the listing itself. if you apply online, it will

take five minutes. you can make it easier creating an account. to get to dalia, you log on to housing.sfgov.org. >> i have lived in san francisco for almost 42 years. i was born here in the hayes valley. >> i applied for the san francisco affordable housing lottery three times. >> since 2016, we've had about 265 electronic lotteries and almost 2,000 people have got their home through the lottery system. if you go into the listing, you can actually just press lottery results and you put in your lottery number and it will tell you exactly how you ranked. >> for some people, signing up for it was going to be a challenge. there is a digital divide here

and especially when you are trying to help low and very low income people. so we began providing digital assistance for folks to go in and get help. >> along with the income and the residency requirements, we also required someone who is trying to buy the home to be a first time home buyer and there's also an educational component that consists of an orientation that they need to attend, a first-time home buyer workshop and a one-on-one counseling session with the housing councilor. >> sometimes we have to go through 10 applicants before they shouldn't be discouraged if they have a low lottery number. they still might get a value for an available, affordable housing unit. >> we have a variety of lottery programs. the four that you will most

often see are what we call c.o.p., the certificate of preference program, the dthp which is the displaced penance housing preference program. the neighborhood resident housing program and the live worth preference. >> i moved in my new home february 25th and 2019. the neighborhood preference program really helped me achieve that goal and that dream was with eventually wind up staying in san francisco. >> the next steps, after finding out how well you did in the lottery and especially if you ranked really well you will be contacted by the leasing agent. you have to submit those document and income and asset qualify and you have to pass the credit and rental screening and the background and when you qualify for the unit, you can chose the unit and hopefully

sign that lease. all city sponsored affordable housing comes through the system and has an electronic lottery. every week there's a listing on dalia. something that people can apply for. >> it's a bit hard to predict how long it will take for someone to be able to move into a unit. let's say the lottery has happened. several factors go into that and mainly how many units are in the project, right. and how well you ranked and what preference bucket you were in. >> this particular building was brand new and really this is the one that i wanted out of everything i applied for. in my mind, i was like how am i going to win this? i did and when you get that notice that you won, it's like at first, it's surreal and you don't believe it and it sinks in, yeah, it happened. >> some of our buildings are pretty spectacular.

they have key less entry now. they have a court yard where they play movies during the weekends, they have another master kitchen and space where people can throw parties. >> mayor breed has a plan for over 10,000 new units between now and 2025. we will start construction on about 2,000 new units just in 2020. >> we also have a very big portfolio like over 25,000 units across the city. and life happens to people. people move. so we have a very large number of rerentals and resales of units every year. >> best thing about working for the affordable housing program is that we know that we're making a difference and we actually see that difference on a day-to-day basis. >> being back in the

neighborhood i grew up in, it's a wonderful experience. >> it's a long process to get through. well worth it when you get to the other side. i could not be happier.

>> president walton: good afternoon and welcome june 29, 2021 san francisco board of supervisors. welcome back to the chamber everyone. [applause] [roll call]