>> okay. good afternoon and welcome to the san francisco historic preservation commission hybrid hearing for wednesday september 21, 2022. to enable public participation sfgtv is broadcasting and streaming this meeting live and we will receive public comment for each item and opportunities to speak during the public comment available by calling 415-655-0001

and entering access code 2486-460-0483. we will take public comment from persons in city hall first and then open up remote access. please speak clearly and slowly and state your name for the record. each speaker is allowed top three minutes and when you have 30 seconds remaining you will hear a chime indicating the time is almost up and i take the next person to speak. for those calling in to submit their testimony when we reach the item please press star three to be added to the queue. when the line is unmuted it's your indication to begin speaking. best practices are to call from a quiet location speak clearly and slowly and please mute the volume. for those attending in person please line up on the screen side of the room and silence any mobile devices

that may sound off during the proceedings. i will take roll. president matsuda. >> here. >> vice president nageswaran. >> here. >> commissioner foley. >> present. >> commissioner johns. >> here. >> commissioner so. >> present >> and commissioner wright. >> here. >> thank you commissioners. we do expect commissioner black to be absent today. first on the agenda is general public comment. at this time members of the public may address items of interest to the public that within the subject matter jurisdiction of the agenda and for agenda items that opportunity is afforded during that time in the meeting and may address the commission up to three minutes. again if you're in the chimp bares please come forward and calling in please star three. >> . >> seeing no requests general public comment is closed and we can move on to department matters. item one department announcements. >> good afternoon

commissioners. i am the director of the planning department. i wanted bring to your attention there's a lot of activity at the state level on housing legislation and one piece in particular that we're following and analyze suggest ab20 len. we did a two page summary of that as well as some maps that we'll send to you because it makes certain projects ministerial. you have to be a roadway of a certain width. you can't demo housing. you have to pay prevailing wage for projects that ultimately get built but it could have an impact so we will send you that summary that we sent also to the planning commission so you have that >> and commissioners i am from the staff. just to provide updates on some of the legislative matters. obviously the board of supervisors is back in full session. the recently -- the board

recently adopted the tenderloin neon special sign district and you had the opportunity to weigh in and provide support for. the board reviewed the landmark designation for city cemetery and mark one of the first lark mands we have in the city and county of san francisco and the planning commission approved the project at 200 audio island and with the trading company and involves rehabilitating the historic buildings and the board is also reviewing and adopting the landmark nomination associated with it so all three items are moving forward smoothly and that concludes our report. >> i would like to ask a question. how far along is ab2011? just introduced? >> no, it's on the governor's desk to sign it. we're anticipating he will sign it and takes

effect july 1 of next year. >> thank you. >> okay. if there's no further queys we can move on commission matters. consideration of adoption of draft minutes for the architectural review commission of august 17, 2022 and the minutes for the regular meeting of september 7, 2022. we should take public comment. public comment members of the public this is your opportunity to speak to the minutes if you want to come forward or press star three. seeing no request to speak from the public it's closed. >> motion to approve. >> second. >> thank you commissioners. on that motion commissioner wright. >> yes. >> commissioner foley. >> aye. >> commissioner johns. >> yes. >> commissioner so. >> yes. >> commissioner nageswaran. >> yes. >> and president matsuda. >> yes. >> so moved that

moves unanimously 6-0. placing on item three commission comments and questions. >> any comments or questions from the commission? i don't see any. >> i actually want to make an announcement. >> commissioner so. >> so it's been about a year and a half that the department of human rights commission and the recreation and park department in san francisco arts commission have been had to do these our san francisco civic historic monuments and memorials and right now it's open for public survey and comment, and there are two public hearings that are equaled. one is september 27 and the second one is october 15. the october 151 is at 10:00 a.m. to noon and the september 11 is at 5:30 p.m. to 730 it'll and i encourage the public to go

on to the san francisco arts commission. they have an on lane survey so please -- this is the time we can actually hear about general public in the comments to our historic monuments and memorial because like many communities across the country san francisco is reckoning with the legacy of white supremacy, patriotic and colonialism in public spaces part of the san francisco civic art collection. many in the collection do not reflect the diversity of san francisco. intentionally erased stories of community was color and reinforces inequality in race, culture and gender and i wanted to share with everyone here and make it on the record this is very important. the city and county of san francisco is making an effort to be maybe the first in the country to make this thing right. please go to the san francisco arts

commission and find the survey. thank you. >> okay commissioners if there's nothing further we can move on to item 4. the sharp park resolution. this is for your consideration for adoption. commissioners we didn't prepare a formal staff presentation however we did refer back to the board's resolution and adopted a draft res for your consideration so that was provided to you in your commission packets. >> and maybe just to add to that at the time that the board the full board met to review the resolution there were some amendments made to supervisor peskin's original resolution to include information about the number of people that were incarcerated at this particular detention center as well as

to talk about the fact that there were many japanese latin americans brought from various countries and incarcerated here and finally to make sure and to strongly encourage the recreation and park department to involve community involvement in the actual creation of the interpretive signage panel that will hopefully be placed there soon. >> okay. we should open up public comment. is there any members of the public who wishes to address the commission on this proposed resolution? come forward. if you're caahing in remotely press star three. seeing no requests to speak public comment is closed. >> commissioner johns. >> so i think this resolution is very important. i think that it's

significant and it really is -- it deals with events which we should not forget so i move that we adopt the resolution supporting the board of supervisors' resolution. >> second. >> seeing no further discussion commissioners there's a motion that has been seconded to adopt the resolution on that motion. wright. >> yes. >> commissioner foley. >> aye. >> john john. >> yes. >> commissioner so. >> yes. >> commissioner nageswaran. >> yes. >> president breed. >> yes. >> so moved that places. >> . >> 6-0 for item 5 for the for remote hearings. this is just a standard resolution to allow for remote hearings if deemed necessary. i will ask if there's any members of the public who wishes to address the commission on this matter? seeing none public comment is closed and the resolution is now before

you commissioners. >> is there a motion? >> jesus i move that we adopt. >> thank you. >> second. >> thank you commissioners. on that motion to adopted a do not resolution. commissioner wright. >> yes. >> john john. >> yes. >> commissioner so. >> yes. >> commissioner foley. >> yes. >> commissioner nageswaran. >> yes. >> president matsuda. >> yes. >> thank you commissioners. that passes 6-0 and we'll place this under items for continuance at the time of issuance and currently there are no items proposed for continuance placing us under the regular calendar for item 6a through f for case numbers as cited from the agenda. for

properties at 2330-2336 steiner agenda. >> . >> 2715 hyde street. 405 terry francois boulevard, 370 south van ness avenue, 444 columbus avenue, 331,824th street, 1509-1511 haight street. these are legacy business registry applications. >> before we jump in we have new staff here today and it's their first time at the commission so if it's can i introduce and give you a little background. >> sure >> and you can all wave or stand up or whatever you would like. everybody is sitting over there. so first and in the order of their presentations here is tot o. and a planner i in

the northwest quadrant and at the department for three months from chicago, illinois where i went to school and interns for planning there and similar to our mtc abag and grated with a masters and planning and policy from the university of illinois chicago. >> welcome. >> brandon gunn. he joined the planning department as an intern in the summer of 2021, was hired full time this year in june as a preservation tech specialist with the southwest team in the planning division. prior to joining planning brandon was a graduate student in historic preservation at clemson university. >> welcome. >> emily lane. welcome emily. prior to joining the department as a planner i in the northeast quadrant she worked in local government in the central valley. she worked as a planner for madera county and the city of

clovis. has a bachelor's degree in arts and science and minor in urban studies and planning from the university of california san diego. >> welcome. >> i feel like willard scott doing this. heather daniels. he joined the department as a planner i on our flex adu team and cod enforcement teams before joining planning. worked briefly for pg&e on the team and graduated in summer 2021 and received the bachelors from san francisco state university. >> welcome >> and dakota speecher. did i get that right? >> [off mic]. >> is a planner i with the southeast team for three months prior to joining planning spent the last two years getting a masters in planning from cal poly pomona and the historic preservation department of the city of west hollywood. >> thank you. welcome all of you.

>> welcome. [applause] >> good afternoon commissioners. i am the from the staff. thank you director for the introductions. i want to let the commission know that my colleague elena is taking over as the coordinator for the planning department moving forward. moving on to the application. we have six legacy business applications today. each of the planners will present their applications and after business representatives and members of the public will have an opportunity to speak during public comment. thank you i will now hand it off to the next speak presenteer. >> hello commissioners. elena moore planning staff. the first legacy business application we have is for bike and rental tours. a 28 year old family owned bike rental and tour company. staff would like to note though this is business less than 30

years old it qualifies for listings on the tree because -- legacy business registry per the code it's operated in san francisco for more than 20 years significantly contributed to the history or identity of a particular neighborhood or community and is not included in the registry it faces a significant risk of displacement. blazing saddles has four active location no, sir san francisco with the main location at hyde street between north beach and beach street. blazing saddles is the recognized leader in offering bike rentals and tours over the golden gate bridge and they have the largest fact of rental bikes in california. blazing saddles bikers go through the fort and presidio national park before the golden gate to salito and returning on the ferry. beyond these service blazing saddles is deeply involved in the local community. they have donated

bikes to gordon j lowell elementary school, participated in the cable car sponsorship program and volunteered in the golden gate national recreation area. blazing saddles is committed to safeguarding their offerings of bike types for a wide range of customers and the variety of tours and the iconic blazing saddles signage and historical features as murals and art work. staff supports this application and recommends a resolution to add blazing saddles bike rental and tours to the legacy business registry. this concludes my presentation and i will hand it off. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. i am from the planning department staff. the second legacy business today is the pose pose yacht club and located at terry

francois boulevard in the market neighborhood. the yacht club is a non-profit membership club dedicated to recreational boating and community service and serving in san francisco since 1974. the organization was established on the principles of promoting guard sports menship, encouraging social recreation and providing activities that include interest in small boating and the members have sustained the club facilities as well as its original mission. the facility welcomes 30 to 40 members or guests per day and utilize the on site boating facility and patio and clubhouse and hosts a wide range of rec alkali and educational activities and supporting boaters and enthusiasts and those interested in water activities. in addition to providing space for

recreation the mariposa hunters point yacht club has community service and holds monthly non-profit fundraisers and hosts programs that provide resources for those who are under represented in boating. this includes the women owned water program and award winning youth sailing program. the mariposa hunters point yacht club is committed to preserving its facilities, its programmatic initiatives and long standing spirit of voluntarism. legacy business status would solidify the yacht club as a essential player in san francisco's boating community. the department is supportive of this application and supports the resolution recommending the mariposa hunters point yacht club to the legacy business registry and this concludes my presentation and i will now hand it off to brandon. thank you. >> good afternoon

commissioners. brandon gunn planning department staff. the third legacy business here today is the larkins brothers tire company an automotive services shop which has been in business for over 72 years. although the business as it exists today was founded in 1950 larkins brothers traces history back to 1865 when the horse drawn carriage company larkins co was founded in downtown san francisco. the business thrived for decade and evolved from servicing and participating armies to working on high end. >> . >> vehicles and airplanes. today the business is still family owned and operated operated by jason whose matter marty purchased the business in 1986 and has a close relationship with clients and true stot

intention of the original founders william and kenneth larkins remains committed to provide the high quality service to the bay area community. the department is supportive of this application and supports a resolution recommending the larkins brothers tire company to the legacy business registry. thank you and i will now hand things off to emily. >> good afternoon commissioners. emily lane planning staff. the fourth legacy business application is for hotel boheme. hotel boheme is a bro teak hotel that is offered welcoming accommodations to international and domestic travelers for the past 31 years. hotel boheme was established by

morganstern and envisioned the interior of hotel boheme as the tribute to the beach generation. the interior of the hotel is stylized as a scenario of the 1950s and the hal ways are adorned with the work of late photographer jerry stole. the architectural design of hotel boheme is emblematic of the rich history seen throughout the north beach neighborhood. originally constructed in the late 1800s the hotel has maintained its italian facade and enhanced by striking green exterior paint. staff is supportive of this application and resolution recommending that hotel boheme be added to the legacy business

registry. this concludes my presentation. our next presenter will be dakota. >> good afternoon commissioners. i am from the planning staff. the next legacy business application we have is for cafe la boheme a 49 year old cafe servedda a creative hub of the residents of the mission district of the it's located at 331,824th street and gained popularity with artists and activists during the 70's as a place of creative express. it's become a gathering place for important events in 1966 under the ownership hosted poetry night and seen it is the lights was local and international poets and they're emphasized to the human connection and a creative space for all

types of artist and politicians and dancers and activists and has a cultural and creative hub in the district and memorialized as a place of community building. staff supports this application and recommends a resolution to add cafe la boheme to the legacy business registry. this concludes my presentation. i am available for questions and i will now hand it off to heather. >> good afternoon commissioners. heather samuels planning staff. the next legacy business business is for club deluxe a live music vendor and bar significant for its role -- sorry -- in providing a space for local artists to perform jazz and swing music. originally one of

several haight-ashbury bars and a hub for jazz and swing revival movement in san francisco of the late 1980's and early 90's. in 1989 the bar was taken over by jay johnson a local artist who would perform at the venue with this club deluxe quartet. he spent attention on the decor and atmosphere between the era at the time. in 2016 sara wild and chris panco took ownership and hosted the live music each day and cocktails at the bar. and maintaining an important piece of san francisco's night life theme. the department is supportive of the application and recommends adding them to the legacy business registry. this concludes staff presentations and we're available for any questions.

>> thank you very much. >> okay. that concludes presentations we should go to public comment. if there any members of the public to address the commission on this matter please come forward. if you're calling in remotely press star three. >> hi. my name is bridget carol and in support of the mariposa hunters point yacht club. i have been past commodore and a member for 15 years along with the bayview started the youth sailing program and from there finding need to know that women also wanted to learn to sail and not being taught by husbands or significant others and it's really popular. just this saturday we cleaning the boats and getting ready for a program and several members of the community they're walking by or riding the bikes and ask questions, what is this? can we rent the

boats? can we get into the sailing program? and we open it for the whole community and not members only and we want to reach out to everybody and we had women who live across the street who joined our group so it's a really great -- it's a really great community. we take care of each other as well as all the organizations that we volunteer for, and raise money for, and also just on a side note the larkins brothers i take my tires there all the time. they're awesome and cafe deluxe is a great place to go to hear jazz music. >> thank you. >> hello commissioners. my name is carrie young and from san francisco heritage. first i want to say we're fully in support of

the legacy business candidates today. they're all fantastic but i am here to talk about club deluxe so the haight-ashbury maybe primarily known for its role in the summer of love but this past august we were excited to spot light the lesser known neighborhood history through the legacy businesses and club deluxe is one of these special places and it's established roots in the haight and as a gay bar and bone as one of the city's best places for jazz and live music so when we discovered that club deluxe would close permanently in the midst of our spotlight month we worked with the owner, supervisor peskin's office and the legacy business registry program to help them complete their legacy business application in the midst of negotiations with their landlord and we're so thrilled that this work really played a

crucial role in those negotiations and ultimately helped keep the business open which everyone is really, really happy about, and so this is just really one example of how the legacy business registry remains an important reservation tool in the city, really helping to raise awareness and especially in this case provide tangible assistance for the special places in our neighborhoods so we fully support their addition to the registry. thank you. >> thank you. >> hi. my name is christopher abraham and been a member of mariposa hunters point club and a been a member for 33 years and the club does everything it can for the community and it is an extremely vital for fleet week. if you

guys don't know we have the widest ramp on the water and the navy uses our facility to embark and disembark. also i think that we have been around for 90 years, not since 78. we just got a proclamation from london breed. that's all i have to say. thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. seeing no additional members of the public in the chambers coming forward we will go to our remote callers. again when you hear the line has been unmuted that's your indication to begin speaking. >> hi. my name is [inaudible]. i'm the owner of cafe la boheme. it's a living room for all of the people of san francisco. we have seen and hosted lots of campaigns for politicians, a few mayors did it from here, judges, supervisors have all

been here. as minorities ourselves we continue to work for communities of color and minoritys in san francisco to come together to express their culture and opinions in a safe place. just in this week we received a few very nice letters from the community from one man from chicago and game to san francisco and spent a month here. he was discussing how we went from cafe to cafe and we were the only place he felt comfortable and safe and being a member of the community around him. just yesterday a few dutch girls came in and toured every restaurant, every business in san francisco and told me how we were the only place they could sit and interact with members of community in informal dining room state that we have. hotel boheme has. >> . >> lado them went through a lot in the city and seen the

pandemic and gentrification and this legacy business will hope us negotiate a lease going forward with the landlord to continue is a special place for everyone in the community. it holds a special place for my family. i regard it as one of my children almost. i have two others, and i really support this application and hope to become part of the legacy business in san francisco. thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. last call for public comment on any of these legacy business registry applications. seeing none public comment is closed and these applications are now before you commissioners. >> great. commissioner johns. >> thank you. before i say anything about the legacy businesses i would like to complete the people that made the presentations. i thought they were unusually good and could be contrasted with others who have appeared before us. you spoke slowly. you

spoke clearly and with an air of confidence that lend authority to your comments and so i think that everyone who appears before this commission ought to study your presentation so we would be much better off if they did so as to the businesses again it's a very interesting and diverse group. i think this is the first time that we've ever had two businesses with practically the same name which i find to be fascinating. it's just there's a couple here that deal with recreation, a couple here that deal with other things. it's just so wonderful to have these businesses come before us. i am personally familiar with only one and that is larkins tires but i'm happy that their reputation has gotten around. thank you.

>> thank you. commissioner foley. >> this is a much more fun hearing than last hearing so thanks for the legacy business versus a contentious theater. on the bicycle one i think it's awesome. if you look it up in the netherlands people actually bike 3-4 miles a day and reduces greenhouse gases and an excellent one and excited about that. the women and kids sailing my father almost killed me when i was young and if my mother was there i wouldn't have been almost killed and that's great. thank you very much. on tire shops. i have a car -- i'm sorry. i have a car. if i ever need tires i'm going to see you. the cafe bo hem and i lived in north beach and hung out there and my mother stayed at there whether she was alive and i

don't need to declare anything. on the club deluxe i have gone there and it's great and i like about legacy business what you you bring to the community and forces everyone to have conversations so thank you very much. >> thank you. commissioner so. >> i have to say i agree with commissioner johns. your presentations of all the legacy businesses it speaks to me that you have practiced and you had perfected your craft so please continue to do so and whoever is your direct report that supervises i you did a good job and welcome to the planning department. i am thrilled to listen to another round of your presentations. for the legacy business this is a very amazing breath of mix of applicants today i have seen. it tells us that we really have our duty to preserve and

retain local small businesses for the city and how it evolved and i me to personally shout out to the larkins brothers because you guys are my life saver and i don't know if you're listening but it's highly recommended by my mechanics after i had gone through so many rounds of misfortune on my car and i love the larkins brothers and i didn't realize you date back to 1865. that's impressive and i have been telling all my friends to go there because you're honest and you don't -- actually you're just honest. i really love it. it's sometimes intimidating for a woman to get their car fixed and speaking on that note i love the mariposa hunters point yacht club. i wanted to find a place that felt inclusive and less smooty for me and my daughter to actually learn sailing. growing up

in hong kong that is actually part of my jam to do but in hong kong it's not exclusive. you just do it and here you have to go across the bridge and i look forward and didn't realize you have the robust outreach and i support that and in support of the applications and particularly club deluxe. it's cool to be in that part of the neighborhood and being able to stop by and have a drink anytime. it's just nice. i think that's kind complete my comment. i really look forward to see all of you in different capacity come back and present to us. good job. well done. >> thank you. commissioner wright. >> yes, i just wanted to pipe in and say that thank you to the legacy business owners and those who are

looking to join the program. i think it's an extraordinary program that's been really helpful to a lot of businesses. it's kept a lot of businesses going, and these businesses are kind of the backbones of our communities so i only have personal exposure to really two, to the blazing saddles and also to the club deluxe. both are amazing and i look forward to further exposure to the other businesses and thank you again. >> thank you. i just also wanted to comment. i'm so glad in this mix of the six legacy businesses that we see two that are in their second generation, and that in my opinion is fantastic. i mean trying to keep a business alive but keeping a business alive for the second generation of family members is

wonderful we rarely see that in san francisco and that's what built san francisco and so happy to see that. also wanted to talk about club deluxe. a couple of supervisor were the coauthors during the pandemic and created a special piece of legislation to keep small businesses alive and help them negotiate rent repayment with their landlords so i am happy to see supervisor preston's activity with this to preserve the legacy business and a finally shout out to rick. he really is the person that really takes a personal interest i think in all the applications that come through, and probably no one knows this except for the two of us, but the city of honlieu you is also interested in creating their own legacy business program and seeking specific advice from rick to

create something in their community so it's not only san francisco that is benefiting from the knowledge that we have here but it's spreading elsewhere and i upon want to thank you for take the time to do that, so i don't see anymore commissioner comments so if there's a motion. >> so you need a motion to approve. >> i do. >> which i make. >> second. >> mariposa hunters point hunters point like lydia. if your daughter wants to attend the new sailing program the next one we quit during the pandemic so the first one is actually october 22 and 23rd. >> okay >> and you're welcome to bring your daughter. >> thank you. thank you. >> we have a motion and a second. >> indeed we do. on that motion then to adopt recommendations for approval on all of these legacy business registry applications. commissioner wright. >> yes. >> commissioner foley. >> aye. >> commissioner johns. >> yes. >> commissioner so. >> yes.

>> commissioner nageswaran. >> yes. >> and president matsuda. >> yes. >> so moved commissioners. that motion passes. >> congratulations. [applause] >> congratulations. >> okay. commissioners that will place on item 7 for this case for the city-wide cultural resources survey update. this is an informational presentation. >> thank you. . >> okay survey team.

>> all right. we will get started. good afternoon commissioners. maggie smith department staff. today i will joined by members of the team to provide an update on the san francisco city-wide cultural resources survey, survey for short. we provided the overview to the planning commission this past june. so we'll first provide a brief overview for those that view to the san francisco survey due to the efforts and talk about progress on community engagement, the city-wide historic context statement and survey and inventory. we will bring it all together and discuss next steps. this roughly follows the outline of the 2022sf survey progress report submitted in your packet. sf

survey is a multi-year effort to identify and document places that are culturally historically and architecturally important to san francisco's diverse community. these places and resources include tangible aspects of the environment such as buildings, objects and districts and intangible things such as oral traditions and arts and festivals and traditional crafts. the findings of the survey will help guide the department's work on future landmark landmark designations, environmental review and developmental projects, area plans and building permit applications. in addition to identifying and documenting places with physical qualities planning is developing a survey approach to consider the non physical aspects of a community's cultural heritage also known

as intangible cultural heritage and this includes resources that can't be touched or held. the i ch gee agree will be a guiding document for sf survey recommendations. >> >> and how to engage with communities and what items they want collected and -- (checking audio). please stand by: and how it is transmitted. efforts to preserve or safeguard and ongoing practice and associated tangible and intangible resources. in the coming months staff will work with communities on a pilot for i ch identification and collection. the pilot will involve developing an approach to this collection lead by and tailored to each

community's needs and interests. the planning development is also developing a shared approachable vocabulary that will aide discussions regarding cultural heritage among department staff, city agencies, stakeholders and the general public. the progress report contains the terms and explains the relationship to one another. this methodology will include and continue to build upon this list. as illustrated by this graphic the sf survey methodology involves five interrelated components to build off one another, community engagement. the city-wide historic context statement, field survey and research and evaluation u findings and adoption and the cultural resources inventory. we have a small team supported by a large internal and external network. although not noted here the historic preservation committee

has provided financial assistance. many of the members are participating in the survey participating group or offering expertise in other ways. from a big picture perspective this will lead to a pour comprehensive understanding and recognition of san francisco history and cultural heritage. on a more day to say focus survey results will make determinations on the historic resource data for all parcels and -- unknown each eligible to either a, historic resource present or c no historic resource present as indicated in the san francisco property map. as we like to say making the unknown known. this means evaluating approximately 116,000 parcels and these determinations will streamline our review processes. many of the components of

the survey will take place in tandem and over the next several years and start to start phase one by the end of this year but subject to the consulting contracting processes. on to community engagement. as presented back in april we're working to center the preservation planning and racial and social equity and aim to meet the goal through meaningful community engagement. this framework was developed in close consultation with [inaudible] and servessa a road m engagement and strategies with partnerships that would guide and inform sf survey. the strategies build on lessons learned from various projects including the housing element update in 2022. we want to meet communities where they are and shifting phasing or adjusting the schedule. this illustrates the relationship of our various interwoven

strategies with one another to the survey process which helps to create a feedback loop. the strategies consist of our internship program, neighborhood chats, community walks, community conversations and digital platforms and media. in the upcoming months we will address feedback on the framework, begin to implement the strategies, and focus on partnership development with emphasis developing the dynamic partnerships with community groups and the community and faith based organizations and exploring ways to better integrate to start [inaudible] into the framework. the team is grateful for the summer interns to looking forward to the fall into assist with these efforts. we have developed a variety of tools and materials thus far. we're working on updates to the faqs, frequently asked questions and website as well as starting to

develop an sf survey newsletter to share important updates, information, hearing dates and community events. to sign up for the newsletter please go to our project web page listed here and click on contact and then subscribe. sf survey will rely heavily on input from the community which is key to develop inclusive findings. in order to facilitate the neighborhood chat strategy and the framework staff need an easy way to collect information from neighbors while surveying in the field. before beginning phase one of the survey we will work with [inaudible] to develop a mobile work flow to collect input from the field. the work flow has the core features. provide information for informed consent, gather contact information if they're comfortable sharing it, awe lot public to add data into the data base or up load file types

including photographs, videos and audio recordings, relate community input to specific places, historic context statements, persons and all of the above in the data base. designate community input as public limited or private information. we will provide a future update to the hpc on the implementation and evolution of the framework and our various tools. i will pass it off to elena moore. >> hello again. today i will be providing a brief update on our city-wide historic context statement. is the presentation still shared? >> [off mic]. >> there we go. as a reminder this is our general framework for the historic context statement. the documents are

divided into them mattic context cultural context and architectural context. >> our team is currently researching and writing a variety of documents. after this presentation the gilded age historic context statement will be before you for adoption. additionally by the end of the year we will bring the progressive era and revitalize styles and [inaudible] african-american and north beach and small apartment statements before the building inspection commission. thank you. >> . >> . historic preservation commission thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. i'm department staff. next i will give an update on the fields projects survey and inventory. to do this survey the department uses a

program called arches. although the planning department maintains data bases from preservation staff this is around parcels and permits and entitlements. arches represents an opportunity to have a data base specifically designed for cultural heritage work and developed by the getty institute and the world monuments fund this offers features with terminology consistency, control, search capacity, geo spatial [inaudible] fuzzy dates and out reach and [inaudible] capability, relationship creation and discovery and the ultimate ability to share the results of sf survey. to illustrate how we will use archs in practice consider 573 castro street. the building is associated with it says developer fernando nelson, its former occupant harvey milk and tenant

castro [inaudible] and subject of landmark designation 227 mentioned in the lgbtq historic context statement and within the boundaries of the california registry castro street historic district. information on each of these aspects of the site's history would be stored in separate data structures known as resource models in arches lingo. for example the properties' architectural style and typology is recorded in the what we call the unit model but biographical information on harvey milk would be in the person model. connection between the models will emstraight the complex relationships between people, places and events that shaped san francisco's history. so far we developed 10 resource models including a community input model for members of the public can share knowledge and stories. our arches models will be populated in part from

data collected during in field survey which will happen across the city in phases and focus on the tangible aspect of the city's history. neighborhoods were assigned a phase based on the d's properties for racial and social equity and historic context statements and capacity. today i will give an overview of the pilot survey conducted this year and prepare for phase one of the survey in next steps. from february to may the department conducted a survey and the goal was survey technology, refine the methodology and implement strategies outlined in the community engagement framework. formal property evaluations were outside of the scope of the pilot of in total the team surveyed more than 400 properties in crocker amazon and conducted follow up research on 100 of them. we learned a lot from the

experience and helped develop efficient work flows for surveying and evaluating properties. i will go over some of the key take aways and updates to the methodology that will impact the field survey going forward. as a result of our experiences in the field sf survey shifted its data collection software from the mobile app to the custom plug in arches work flows. we always planned to use this for task management and review but by working with the software consultants we were able to make this technology compatible with our devices and lessen the time surveying each property in the field. next slide please. this helped us get a head start on work flow for property and evaluation. this work flow currently under development. next slide please. at the beginning of the pilot staff collected data on more than a dozen

attributes for each building in the field. this process was time consuming and required staff to spend 10 minutes in the field alone per property with additional time researching and evaluating. over the course of the pilot staff experimented -- staff sought to stream line this process by experiencing with the baseline information to collect for each permanent and which attributes to collect in the field versus in the office. ultimately we landed on a revised methodology that limits in field collection to taking a photograph of each property recording the level of alteration. all other data will be collected in the office. this slide shows the attributes we will collect for each property and the additional information we will procedure for historic resources. this allowed us to reduce survey time to two minutes per

property and achieve our goal of spending less than 10 minutes on average combined per property across field work, research and evaluation. the graphic on this screen illustrates how the data collected during sf survey differs from traditional forms which the state no longer requires for historic resources surveys and fields in black are collected and in green only for historic resources and in red won't be collect forward any properties. this methodology was reviewed by the state office of historic preservation which confirmed it will fulfill the obligations as a government and fill the statutory statutory requirements under the california environmental quality act. i will hand it back to mag and he how this connects to the larger survey in methodology. >> okay. so bringing

it all together. as we previously noted we have organized our work into six phases geographically. on the screen we have outlined how staff is structuring each phase work flow from left to right. the starting point which has been in progress for a while lays the foundation for each parcel. staff then gathers additional data in the field from the community and through the historic search and prepare the report of six. by taking part in the review and [inaudible] review draft findings before they are pushed to the public phasing [inaudible] map or integration such as arches. parallel to this work flow components of the historic context statement will be adopted upon completion. this is a multi-year iterative process. draft findings will

be shared publically upon the completion, however, the final adoption of the cultural resources inventory happens after community engagement and the hpc adopts all components of the city-wide historic context statement so the final determinations are made through a city-wide lens. we envision the cultural resources inventory to be a living repository. ultimately findings will further streamline permits and project review and provide future heritage initiatives and providing cultural resource information in a public facing format. and finally our next steps. we will look forward to refining our methodology for historic districts and evaluation review. the [inaudible] methodology and pilot, updating the community engagement and continuing progress on

the city-wide historic context statement and -- >> we're also currently upgrading our data base to version seven of arches and includes a variety of performance updates but one of the features we're excited about is the ability to store and display data in multiple languages which is important step towards achieving the participation and equity goals outlined in the community engagement framework. we're continuing the audits of data and preparing legacy data for arches and customizing the reports for phase one of the sf survey this. concludes staff's presentation and we're available to answer any questions that you may have. thank you. >> thank you. that cob concludes public presentation. we will open up public comment. please come forward or if you're calling in

remotely press three. seeing no speakers this is closed and this is informational and this is before you. >> are there any questions -- okay. commissioner foley. >> i think this is really interesting and great. i appreciate the presentation and i really appreciated where you showed graphically how it worked and technology and me don't get along at all and it was good and with the arches data base are we able to dump it into a qr code and it's my hot bothen. i know it's my thing. >> commissioner wright -- please answer commissioner foley's question. that is fine. >> yes. >> commissioner wright. >> yeah. i just want to congratulate and complement the

staff on such an amazing job. you know just every time you come before us we see amazing progress and the presentation was very informative, so just extremely helpful. i did have one question for ms. smith about when you were discussing kind of the process and the final adoption. is there any kind of very rough estimate as to when final adoption may occur? >> yes. i can answer that question. just by going back to our rough timeline. again several other -- as i mentioned throughout the presentation there are several factors that impact the schedule, but on these slides can you see the findings and adoption will happen phase by phase

so draft findings you could expect to see them at some point in 2023 likely towards the second half of 2023, and then that will happen through the phases through 2026. >> okay. >> as we estimate currently. >> thank you. >> sure. >> there's so much information it's a lot. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner so. >> i am very impressed of the breath of content from last time. you were just here last month, so thank you for doing all these work and this is really phenomenal and i do have -- just one minor questions about the historic context statement part. is the period of time between the thematic context versus the architectural context so the thematic context was

range from 1848 to 1989 but then the architectural context with the style only identify up to 1940 so i'm curious what are we considering to do from 1941 to 1989? . >> hi. i am the team lead for the city-wide survey. that's a good question commissioner so. i think we're missing a slide. we do have the architectural styles that lead up -- >> i think category e. >> sorry. we apologize about that. >> okay. thank you. >> yeah, commissioner so just to address we do have an adopted modernism context statement that we do work from so that basically covers that era and i know the team is

working through a post modern up to the 70's, 80's context that highlights buildings from that era. >> yeah, that's really helpful because we recently got educated how recent style of architecture since i was born is now historical. [laughter] >> that summarize my comments. >> thank you. commissioner johns. >> yes. i just wondered whether i may have missed this in your forum but will there be any attempt to include to include legacy business status in what you're doing? >> thank you for that question commissioner johns so the answer is yes. one of our models is called the activity model, and it covers

things like legacy business status. it covers things like historic resource, evaluation responses, or article 10 landmark designations so a lot of events that happen at this commission work that produced by the planning department or other agencies would all be stored in that model and then connect to the model that has information on the physical locations where the business might be located >> thank you. >> thank you. commissioner nageswaran. >> thank you. so of course you know being the architectural person that i am i'm going to ask a few kind of more specific questions about it. for those 116,000 parcels are they the ones that are in the gray area

on your map or -- >> thank you. good question. so those are all category b properties unknown age eligible. >> they're all over. >> we don't know whether it's a resource or not. >> okay. >> so the map symbology is for the phasing. >> got it. so then my question would be would this mean that all these buildings that you're evaluating and i noted you had the dpr forms, and your survey form. would that mean you would categorize them as a or c and not have to do the part one historic resource evaluation that typically comes with projects done on you know various buildings? >> yes. so the goal is to move away from that process where we have city-wide survey we

can rely on for historic resource information and not to have to do that property by property kind of reactive. we're doing this in a more proactive matter. >> so you're consolidating the prior information of 30 years of -- >> exactly. just related to alex resnick's presentation about a month ago. >> okay. and so the other question would be if you're evaluating these and they go into the data base when would the owners know that their property has been categorized a or c? >> so the draft findings will come out with each phase and as part of that process we'll share with the property owners and i think in the past we have done mailed a letter so we will find ways to contact the

owners so they have the preliminary information, the draft findings, and then we can share it with them before it's finalized and adopted >> and would there be any sort of method by which they could you know say "well we have this additional information and we see it could be historic resource" or it's not a historic resource. >> yes. that's kind of another way we hope to use the community work flow and not only as going through the process doing outreach sort of throughout the survey but also if people are able to find more information we have it because we're doing con16,000 properties then they can submit that through the community input model and we will take another look if there is sufficient documentation to indicate another finding. >> so when you're evaluating these are you looking at -- i

mean you're doing the evaluation sealed 10 minutes of that and then coming back and looking more deeply at these things for associations association events and architectural importance and providing that evaluation and when the community is providing the materials, up loading materials how are those vetted? and how can those be sorted so that there's a sense of relevance? >> excellent questions. maybe we could just pull up one of the arches' diagrams, so the way our data base works is we get information in a variety of different places, and arches allow us to connect that information such as community input to the property, so someone could submitted information, and then we'll have our

internal process okay we just got this new community input. we're going to review it and assign it to the property or maybe assign it to a person or historic context statement and that helps to inform our research and findings. >> how do you know it's a reliable source? what do you say once -- oh this is not a reliable source or it's relevant material. how do you --. >> i think they're things we're going to be figuring out as we go and working on -- as i said earlier refining our methodology and that can also include how we review community input but then functions of the input if they don't want to share publically and want it only internally that's another option. >> there's a sensitivity to some of

this; right? so i think i've heard that there are sensitivities in certain communities to the types of materials they're providing, and maybe not seen as relevant, and how to bridge that gap especially with highly sensitive communities, so -- yeah thank you. >> thank you. commissioner wright. >> yeah, i just had one follow up question regarding i know we're talking 116,000 unknown status but does this process has update to the known resource or no resource categories? . >> so we will be looking closer at our existing historic districts and found as a result of historic resource responses sometimes known as

ceqa or california environmental quality act and there might be changes but we will be sure to notify property owners. >> yeah. maybe it would apply more to the ones that were not a resource previously or may have become a resource since they were last reviewed. >> yeah, criteria r commissioner wright i can chime in. >> . >> i think the priority is hit the areas we haven't surveyed before and since we have good information from past surveys on the historic status for some properties and for example eastern neighborhood his a good majority of properties surveyed. we're prioritizings other areas of the city where we don't have as much information. i will note with the development of the cultural context in particular that if something we will likely we will go back through and reassess but we're making sure to put our

efforts towards the biggest bang for our buck in short and making sure we fold it into the larger work program. >> thank you. >> i have a quick question. maybe when you were starting off with the test of surveying and shared with us that people in the neighborhood were coming up to you and asking what you were doing and you were collecting information without really having to advocate for that and they were just curious and they just started to share that. now that part is getting more main stream or more codified -- i don't know, better documented or however you want to systemize and you're doing less being out physically out in the community and spending more time providing a better framework, but so are

you going to -- along commissioner nageswaran's point are you going to increase then? is it more robust community input type of campaign for lack of a better way to kind of figure out how to get information? and also along commissioner nageswaran's point and not wearing the architectural point but a legal hat. legal issues and privacy issues as well and i wondering if there is a protocol or policy to adopt so people can feel reassured and feel safe to use the planning department as a repository for things that maybe things that never have been seen before because i think that is important and i am wondering along the lines of tapping into existing resources that have already done this like the national archives for example or the california state library. they have the policies

and protocols in place where they do digitalization but not of everything for privacy and other reasons. i am just thinking out loud to hopefully increase your data base, increase the richness but also protect the privacy and the respect of the citizens. >> yeah. thank you for those questions and to address the first one our community engagement framework -- so what the community input work flow addresses one of the strategies and the other strategies include community events and walking around with neighbors not the intention to be surveying but a tour of the neighborhood or with community members and different cultural groups, and then going to existing meetings so going to standing organization meetings, and then partnering with the library. i know we have talked about that

in the past, and then so yes we're starting to really ramp up that part of the engagement for the phase one especially, then for your second question in the community input work flow it starts with informed consent, and we're working internally with staff to make sure that meets all of our examples where people have submitted information to us and how we accepted that in the past. >> thank you. >> commissioner so did you have another question or comment? >> i just have a really quick one. with this amount of effort and survey to our community and most of our communities might not be really understanding what this all means, and that might come quite daunting or fear, fear just because of

purely unknown so i wanted to emphasize a part of the aspect of the survey or maybe in general. we need to have a very good easy to find website or some sort of out reach to teach our public about what is [inaudible], what other resources they can use to if their property became a resource then what kind of leverage they can do to maintain to be affordable, right, to actually continue to live in our city, and also coming up is our intangible cultural methodology. that topic is relatively new to folks including the experts and it might be really nice to actually have a place on the website that is easily find to kind of like these are the

guiding principles that are above and beyond the interior -- the secretary of the interior's standards because san francisco we have do have multiple layers of these governing policies that guide us, and so that's just really need to do something to demystify the public unknown and confusions and worry. thank you. >> thank you. it's a great presentation and thank you very much for the update. >> okay. >> just one final thought. i just want to bring in the housing element and the work we're doing with a td about process and giving certainty to our process and reducing process, and this i think is an extremely important element of that. as we said it's making the unknown known which as

we look to rezone in the city and provide space for 80,000 units that's important and doing it in a way that improves our timelines and processes is extremely important aspect to that, so it's fortunate that it's happening at the same time. we're under take the housing element work and the implementation of the housing element which means rezoning in certain neighborhoods and having this information available is critical. >> yes, i agree. thank you. >> okay commissioners. if there's no further deliberation we can move on to item eight. case number as cited. for the city-wide historic context statement. gilded age styles 1870-1910 circa. this is to adopt, modify or

disapprove. >> okay. good afternoon commissioners. elena moore planning staff again. today i am bringing the guild styles statement to you for adoption this was research and written by anne greening and

summer 2021 in turn. this document was reviewed by multiple document preservation planners, the survey advisory group and robert attorneyy professor emeritus san francisco university and we sought feedback from the alliance but only heard back today and provided copies of the email. we had conversations internally and hpc with the terminology shift and continue collaborating with the alliance post hearing. okay. today's presentation will include an introduction to the project and then a deeper dive historic context statement and accompanying framework. as a reminder this historic

context statement is an architectural context and broader historic context statement. as in the highlighted term while the styles in this theme have been historically referred to as victorian architecture then the department used to use the term gilded age to reflect american history rather than british history. now we can get into the project itself. this context statement centers on residential, commercial, educational, religious and mixed use properties designed in five guild styles. italian, stick eastlake, queen anne, second empire and [inaudible] roman ecof the period of significance is from 1870 to 1910 circa and ubiquitous across san

francisco and identifies certain neighborhoods with higher concentrations. the project is guided by two goals to provide a framework for consistent informed evaluations of the gilded age structures and inform the sf survey effort and make sure that property evaluations are consistent with local, state and federal standards. today i will give a brief overview of the overall content of the document and primarily focus on the framework for three styles and applications for various properties. historic context statement includes an a sortment of information, historic overview of the gilded age both nationally and in san francisco and dedicated sections of each of the five styles that include prominent practitioners and landmarks and historic districts designed in the style, character defining features and more. then there is

an k companying framework that sets guidelines for properties eligibility under the criteria as cited. now i will cover the evaluation frameworks. for the same of time i will cover three styles in the presentation however the frail work for all five styles can be found in the packets. the first i will cover today is italian ate inspired by villas of the italian country side and offer the combination of picturesque symmetry and has a time of significance as cited and have character defining features as wooden siding, wood ornaments, parapets and angled bay windows. one example of this building that is eligible is landmark 139 st. charles school

constructed in 1888 seen on the left hand side. this is a rare surviving example of this architecture that is constructed in the period of significance and retains character defining features. because these buildings are so common in san francisco for attention of integrity is not sufficient to constitute individual significance. this example displays rare or unique examples of form, massing, define detailing and elevated above other buildings. the building on the right is 390 sanchez street. this commercial structure does not retain architectural integrity. the only remaining ornament is the brackets on the corners and the windows have been replaced and any ornamentation around the windows has been removed and leaving only the wooden cladding . this is an

example of a i tannial ate building under the eligibility framework that is not eligible for this significance under the criteria. the next style is sticky eastlake and most popular in san francisco in the 1880's and 1890's and most used residential frame style at the time. here the retention of wooden siding, windows and brackets andornments are of particular note. the photo has cottages on minnesota street. though the ormentation is not elaborate and has the windows and all the things shown here and together the buildings communicate this is once a working class neighborhood and contribute to the dogpatch historic district. the photo on the right is 1349

south van ness and has stucco over the facade does not retain architectural integrity. the cladding combined with the removal of theornments renders the building not to communicate this style. the last one i will cover today is queen anne for the work and classic details and timbering and pattern masonry and the period of significance from 1885 to 1910 and retention of character defining features as wooden siding and shingles and cut away windows and ornaments are particular importance. on the left you can see landmark 182,

182 the building displays multiple cross cables, shindels and variety of windows shapes and bay windows and an example of queen anne architecture. the photo on the right is olson's queen anne cottages on harrison street between 21st and 22nd street and retain integrity and contribute to an eligible district. each residential has a simple form with entry porch and cut away bay windows. though ornmentation is simple and this concludes the discussion of the selected evaluative frameworks. so in conclusion the department recommends adoption of the gilded age styles historic context statement and we're available for any questions. >> thank you. that concludes staff's presentation. we should open public

comment. members of the public please come forward. seeing none in the chambers we will go to our remote callers. again when you hear your line is unmuted that's your indcasion to begin speaking. >> thank you commissioners. good afternoon. my name is robert turney. it was my privilege to be consult with the planning department staff in the preparation of this and i am very impressed with the work they have done. i would like to add a comment about the use of the term "gilded age" rather than victorian. between 1996 and 96 i -- 1995 and 96 i was president of the historians of the gilded age and the progressive era and the national organization for historians that specialize between civil war and world war l. those of us that do so long ago

agreed that the reigns of british monarchs had little to do with the period of u.s. history so i am particularly pleased that the department has agreed to go to the same terminology that was used by by those that study that field. thank you commission. >> thank you. >> okay. last call for public comment. need to press star to be added to the queue. seeing no request to speak commissioners public comment is closed and this matter is now before. >> you can thank you very much. commissioner nageswaran. >> so i found it interesting the letter from the victorian society that and also the comment just now. when i first saw this i thought oh gilded age, and i went and having written some of

the history for various properties i went to the two terms and gilded age is often related to the opulent mansions of newport and that kinds of thing as well, and you know i think during that period of time there was travel between europe and the united states. some of these styles came over with people learning at the bizarre and british schools and bringing that element to the united states and making its own, and so i was more -- you know and then i looked down at the other italian and queen anne and [inaudible] and some of those also have relationships to the british empire.

queen anne is a misnomer because she lived in the 1700's and some of that has run into the period from the late 19th century to the early 20th century so there's always going to be a mixture of these things and not necessarily -- we're not going to get a perfect name for something, but i do agree with mr. thompson in terms of having an i've identifiable term as victorian in san francisco, and i also think that many of the styles in san francisco are so unique to san francisco that you know we would almost have to make another term for the whole thing because we're very different, and so i hesitate to kind of all of a sudden switch to gilded age which is actually seems to me as much of

a you know reference to you know higher end architecture versus the variation that you've shown in your presentation, so that's my comment. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner johns. >> thank you. well, following up on commissioner nageswaran's comments i was rather [inaudible] when i read "gilded age." the gilded age of course was a term coined by mark twain whose specific reference as commissioner nageswaran said to newport and to -- and opulent and very brief style of living, and if you had ever been to or studied the mansions in newport you of course know that they were used

for only a few weeks each year, and quickly fell into rather faded grandeur. i listen with interest to what mr. turney said and which echoed what we heard earlier about the attempt to americanize the term of world history. the problem is for me with that is you have certain people who would like to change what almost everybody thinks, and that is to say the term "gilded age" in my opinion is known by very few people, but everybody in the country knows what "victorian architecture" is and that's what

everybody in the country calls it you know, so i think it's a mistake to have this title gilded age. as a compromise perhaps victorian gilded age and better and more straightforward, more transparent to just call it what everybody says it is and that is victorian. that's my comments. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner wright. >> yes. i have two comments. first i will follow up on commissioner nageswaran and commissioner johns' comment. i can see the point of mr. turney was making and that the reasoning behind use of the term "gilded age." i do also think that that i agree

the sub-styles are associate said kind of largely in public eye with the term "victorian." i think that commissioner johns' suggestion as a potential compromise, victorian guild, or gilded age victorian maybe appropriate as a way to kind of include all of that, but i think people that are using this might not associate the term "gilded age" with the buildings it's talking about. the second comment and question really is where i am seeing the terms -- well relative to the listing of period of significance where we

have circa 1880 to 1885. if users or community members are using this document circa is a little bit vague. i know it gives some leeway but there maybe some questions when it comes to that, and people are using the document. i know "period of significance" is intended to be a pretty specific date or date range, so i don't know if staff might like to comment on that. >> yeah commissioners. i was going to say just in reaction to some of the commentary it might be helpful if ms. moore or one of the survey team members comes up and discusses how we

address this dichotomy between victorian and gilded age in the actual document. >> yeah. i know that you put a lot of thought into this so it would be great to share that. >> hi. marcel. i have to admit we don't have the correct staff people here for that discussion only because in the earlier part of 2021 we had multiple hearings at hpc and the planning commission recently on this topic so admittedly we didn't realize we were going to get this feedback but can i give you general background that i recall from the time and we can schedule this for greater discussion. there was another terminology change that was also made early part of 2021 and it might be worth bringing that back as well when we shifted edwardian era to progressive era and might be worthy of a larger discussion and i don't want to minimize that but i don't know

if i'm the subject matter expert on that and as mr. turney said in the comments and due to the timing i think we started and percolating and thinking about this more through the lens through racial and social equity and think going colonialism and how a terminology change might help reflect from our perspective the american history from a broader extent. also the term use of the gilded age was allowing us to ordinance passes . >> . >> encompass the broader style and that was the thinking at the time so i will leave that there for now and we can bring this back for a larger discussion and all the terminology shifts again and i think we have new commissioners as well that didn't hear the discussion. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner foley. >> yeah i have a couple of things to say. one i think that staff did a lot of work on this and i really appreciate that work and i don't

have an issue at all with gilded age. the one thing i do have an issue is that i do believe you did reach out to the victorian alliance and what is frustrating to me that the planning staff they go through a lot of work and a lot of time and last minute somebodies "well i have an opinion or i disagree with you" and i don't think that's fair. i think they have to be engaged the whole way through and i think that's what the planning staff tries to do both from historic and everything else so i really appreciate what you're doing. i appreciate you want to bring the people that have been working on this and closest to the ground to talk about it but personally gilded age works for me. the work you do works for me and people coming in the last minute and throwing a hand grenade in the room isn't really fair so thank you very much. >> thank you. commissioner nageswaran. >> so i mean and i don't know the conversations that occurred earlier last year, so that's good

to know as well. as far as the racial and social equity i think important to remember colonialism and not to do it again and so to you know i don't want to just take away terms and then have people forget what that meant to society. it's disconcerting in a way with the edwardian area and the progressive area. no one knows what happened during that time when they're looking at other sources of information? obviously moving forward we always have to be sort of cognizant of other groups and doing leaps and bounds for a more

ecequitable history and it can be confusing to go backwards and those references because there was an influence obviously that's why it was named that way, but i think something that could be done to improve that historical context is part of what you said in your presentation. here's the victorian era. although the united states was highly influenced by european styles it had its own way of dealing with these issues and the way and speaking about the actual history here, and kind of bridging that gap, so that's my thought about it. i appreciate it. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner johns. >> thank you. commissioner foley made a very interesting and i think over the long-term quite important point, and that is about not waiting until the last

minute. in the past i castigated sh heritage for doing the same thing although heritage asked that the hearing be continued and that rubbed me the wrong way and that's another point that ought to be studied by those who appear before the commission, but i must also say that the letter from victorian alliance is not what alerted me to this problem. it was a nice expression of it, but i do think that it -- well, i made my comments earlier. there's one thing that commissioner nageswaran just said which i think is of importance and that is victorian styles in england have their own distinct characteristics. i live for many -- well, for four, five

years in chicago on south side in hide park where there's a number of victorian buildings. very few of them wood. almost all of them brick or stone and they are entirely different from the what you see in california and in san francisco where thanks to mill work we had our own particular flights of fancy. at any rate i thought it was a very good idea to continue this hearing until we can have the other commissioners present and we can have a further discussion about this term, and so i am prepared to make such a motion. >> thank you. . >> so commissioners since it seems like the term -- the thing that i will

say that i -- how am i going to frame this? i want to avoid focusing on the term as opposed to the document itself, right, and that is the crux of the issue here, and i think the commissioners could adopt a resolution basically supporting both the document with specific direction to us to refine the term or refine the cover letter, or basically work through that phase or that aspect of it while not holding off on the kind of meat of the document and the kind of the pieces in here. like a lot of the context statements we have right now part of why we go forward for commission approval is so that we can publicize it and kind of put it out there for public consumption, and then it becomes something that is used by consultants. it's used by homeowners. it's used by whom ever and especially

with the architectural context that you're going to be seeing now as well as in the future they're usually pretty well accepted in terms of the content, right, that's behind it, and the part that i will say that i get pause on is focusing on the semantics of it, and i don't want to like to minimize but i want to make sure that we acknowledge great we will work on it and we'll happily refine the document based on what thoughts are in the future. you know i think one of the things if anything the timeframe we're in right now as well as in the last three years thinged have changed; right? how we do things have changed. what we think about has changed. what we acknowledge in terms of history and how we acknowledge history has changed, and so

i think i will say this on our end as well on the department's end we're happy to embrace that change and happy to make sure that we try and reach consensus where we can, so that's just some thoughts as for your deliberation on this item. >> if i could then what is your contemplation that there would be some approval on perhaps today of the substance, and then you would come back to us upon another occasion to discuss the title? >> yeah, i think that's appropriate, right. i think the commission could adopt a resolution supporting the document with a specific direction that states that the terminology "gilded age" be considered or be refined or considered in a future. generally shall we do acknowledge in the context statements are living documents and i

think we have a clause in the resolutions now that gives us the ability to refine them as new information comes forward in the future. i would say this one is right in line with that as we discuss this further and even as a way of striking a good compromise on this we could refine the title to just state gilded age with parentheses victorian era styles and basically make sure it's out there for consumption. >> i like things to move forward. i make a motion to approve with staff to work together with other groups to finalize the final name but let's actually adopt the body of work and start getting it out there. thank you. >> i have a question about that, and would that include a specific date by which this will come back to the commission on the issue of the title?

terminology. >> staff comes back in three hearings from now to comment and tell us what they can do about the name. >> may i actually offer my comment just before we motion to this? i really appreciate the amount of work, and i think that like as was mentioned that in of the past years recent years it's been -- we evolve. we change and we implemented a lot of intangible assets into cultural heritage and resources, and i have been sitting in this room with a lot of people that have been systematically margaret mcarthurizeed in the community, native americans. >> . >> ramaytush ohlone tribe and i heard about the wording and specific wording and colonialism is affected how they felt and well being and the generation

-- actually traumatized. when you're in the room with 30 or 100 of them and many more looking at you might want to think about what we wanted to represent ourselves as a city and county of san francisco moving forward and i actually really appreciate it and maybe i wasn't there yet in year -- whatever year the terms have changed, but personally i am from a minority and i would have some gut reactions how terminologies are used that are implicitly bias among my own people so i think that with the amount of work the staff had created in the representing this period of history i don't have personally have no problem with this word even though i am also myself as a technically trained

architect and i understand how we use the jargons to make references to a period of time that we all can relate to and we can all dial into a certain motifs and character defining features but i think for san francisco it is the time to take the step to shift that paradigm to make our history again so i am agree with revisiting the terminology just with that word "victorian" you i'm fully support of the staff work here toy did fine the context statement for this period. i do want to share my opinion not just by myself but also representing other people who had less of privilege and time to be sitting among us on this podium or actually call in or write letters because they are struggling. they are probably working three different jobs a day.

okay. >> commissioner nageswaran. >> i did read through the materials and i know that you did reference a lot of the things that i already said, so i have no objection to the body of the work, and i respect what commissioner so has said. i still feel that remembering history is actually rememberringly the colonialism and understanding what what happened at that time and not negating it. i am an immigrant and came from a country not far before i was born it was a colony so it's a short history from that time to me. my grandfather lived in england in the 1920's and so i have a real understanding and a connection to it. there's lots of things that came

with colonialism obviously and we need to remember it, and at the same time i think write it into the history of what it is. say it's a victorian or gilded age but be clear that it has a reference -- those both has a reference to something else, not to the architecture of san francisco. >> thank you. commissioner wright. >> yeah. i want to follow up on that and i appreciate what commissioner so and commissioner nageswaran just said and what mr. sucray was saying about context statements being living documents and we would have the ability to further this discussion and change and update or further explain the terminology. i was just peering back through and the first

line of the introduction of the document or within the document does state that that styles of historically referred to as victorian and described the department's reasoning briefly for changing to the gilded age. i also would not have a problem with gilded age -- with using the terminology gilded age practice reason thyself formerly victorian or formerly referred to as victorian in a way to clarify that, but i do agree that moving forward with the body of of the work as it's completed is probably a good move. i don't object to what is included in the document now. >> so commissioner johns did you want -- >> so i then -- >> revise.

>> commissioner foley's motion which of course includes the later clarification. >> so just to summarize for purposes of the motion it's my understanding that all the commissioners are okay with moving forward with the substantive part of the statement but there is some interest to further revisit the category that is currently named and maybe you can make that available to the public as this document moves on, and goes through the second or third iteration and you come back to the commission once that is i guess more formally discussed and shared with the public, and then share your findings with us. >> it's three

hearings from now work for you? . >> i would like to leave it open for staff rather than putting a specific calendar date to that. >> that works for me and my motion. does that work for you commissioner johns? >> well, that's what i do not -- i have an issue with that. it doesn't necessarily have to be a specific date if that's not convenient for staff at this time but it should be a date not later than? >> how about not later than january 15, 2023? >> no. how about before the end of this year? >> we can maybe put it at the end of the last hpc hearing for the end of this year and should you need more time you would come back and let us know. >> that's fine. >> that's my motion. >> sorry just to clarify, commissioner

commissioner matsuda the direction we should have discussions with the community about the terminology change before coming back to the commission? >> correct. >> perfect. thank you. >> if i might just add one more thing they forgot to say. >> sure. >> for consideration and for staff to be thinking about as this goes forward and considering that the update to the terminology just want to think about terms that are within the sub-styles listed like queen anne. i mean we could talk about gilded age versus victorian all we want but then i think we have to consider references in the sub-styles that might be forgotten. >> okay commissioners i heard a motion that it was seconded. i didn't hear a second on the motion to continue. it seems like the maker

withdraw the motion -- >> i thought that was part of his motion. >> right. >> if it wasn't then i second that. >> very good commissioners. that's a motion and seconded to adopt the historic context statement with direction for staff to refine the terminology and return to the historic preservation commission no later the end of this calendar year. on that motion commissioner wright. >> yes. >> commissioner foley. >> aye. >> commissioner johns. >> yes. >> commissioner so. >> yes. >> commissioner nageswaran. >> yes. >> and president matsuda. >> yes. >> so moved. that motion passes 6-0 >> and i think that bring us to the end of our agenda. we're adjourned. thank you. [gavel]

>> let's begin. we'll start off with 90 second opening statement in order. welcome, candidates and thank you for participating. introduce yourself. tell us which neighborhood you live in and why you are running for district 6 supervisor. i will start with ms. billie cooper. >> hi. everyone i'm ms. billie cooper. i'm a 53 year old [inaudible] >> use