the project would not cause substantial adverse impact to the erinson building, that the project would not cause substantial impact on the building and to any significant cumulative historic issues. second, the hpc properly adopted findings regarding to the project. i want to clarify what we mean by cumulative shadow impact. the eri established that it would know impact this. however in particular the transbay project, the eir concluded because they are in a similar area and shadow similar open spaces, not just union square but other public open spaces in the event of the area would have a cumulative impact in which the project would make a consideration contribution. the project would make that cumulative considerable contribution. in rejecting the two reduced height alternatives analyze in the eir, the hpc found that even these alternatives would have a contribution to shadow an open space generally. also not only on financial reasons but also based on other policy factors including failure to provide the benefit package, substantially reducing the density in an area that the city ha

the erinson building portion of the project. the procession has to be consistent with the architectural character of the building. additionally they can not damage or destroy any of the distinguishing original qualities or character of the building. the integrity of the distinctive stylistic features are examples of craft man shift have to be preserved. additionally if distinctive architectural features cannot be repaired, then they have to be replaced in kind wherever possible. contemporary designs and alteration are permitted however they can not destroy original features of the building and they have to be compatible in material, size and character of the building. there are few other requirements, but essentially it goes to distinctive features that have to be reattend. when you look at the compatibility of the conservation district, the general requirement is the scale and size of the buildings and the character defining features in the nominations ordinary that propose the district. those are the standards that this body a

as you are all probably aware, the erinson building is a quake survivor built in 1903 and we want it to continue. the development of this building of the terra cotta will be repaired and the large entry on mission will be reintroduced and elements such as the 1979 additions will be removed. and providing a new rooftop garden will greatly invigorate this corner. therefore i highly recommend your denial of this appeal of the hpc findings of the project. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, my name is eric broaders, born in san francisco. one of the things that makes this city great is our historic buildings. i work in a building that had a historical upgrade 25 years ago. i feel that the upgrades for the erinson in the building does the same things which help reinvigorate. i support the appeal be denied. >>> good afternoon, board and san francisco. my name is benjamin. i'm a city college san francisco city instructor born and raised here in san francisco in the mission district and graduate of uc hastings college of the law. in anticipation of this great san francisco

for new support of the 706 mission street mexican museum and residential project and to support the erinson building as proposed by the sponsor capable of city planning staff and city's historical preservation experts. i worked at one time when i was going to law school as to one of the schools there. the building is being advanced at the highest national level to ensure that we in san francisco have rich and cultural assets. i stand before you to share with you that as a trustee, we take our job and responsibilities extremely seriously to the point where we have been acknowledged the first in the west coast and san francisco. to bring about this final adoption of the development of the mexican. >> good afternoon president chiu. medications -- members of the board of supervisors. i'm here the urge you to affirm the permit and wanted to read you a letter from the improvement district that addresses their support. dear supervisors, as you know the district is dedicated to the improvement of the neighborhood in general and the union square in general. we support this project. the development o

within this appeal, one of it's, i'm really considering hpc consideration around the erinson building and the major features of the conservation district. i believe hpc has done it's due diligence and will be making a motion to move forward item 48 and table item 49 and 50. >> we have a motion by supervisor kim, can we get a second? second by supervisor avalos. >> thank you, i want to thank all the members of the public that have been working on this issue for many many years. i want to take a moment to explain my own thinking about where things are. i happen to think that the issues involves in this appeal is quite a closed case. i know it's not a perspective from most of you. one of the charges that we are asked to make is whether there is a significant impact where we have analyzed all feasible mitigation. the height of which the building would not shadow union square is 350 feet. the building proposed is 480 feet. i think you have heard that there is not a huge amount of shadow that will cast for about a half hour during certain parts of the year. proposition k was passed in the 1

the erinson building portion of the project. the procession has to be consistent with the architectural character of