as you know the hpc came into being in january of that year. so as a way to get the document in front of you in anticipation of doing the ceqa review. in 2009 and 2010 we had funding for ceqa review in the element but the funding was eliminated from the economic down turn and budget cuts. the elements instead on the shelf for some time and most recently as you know from our budget discussions we were able to reinstate the funding for that ceqa review in our next fiscal year starting july first. 1st. at this time we felt there are a number of reasons to revisit the document 1 is when the hpc reviewed the document previously we didn't have an adopted article 10 and 11. with articles 10 and 11 and year 25 hearings on the details of those planning code amendments, there is a lot of policy changeers in there that could serve the element and be reflected in the element that we should probably revisit. also the one other thing with the spur report, the spur heritage task report has a lot of great recommendations that we all agree with can help improve

at this time we felt there are a number of reasons to revisit the document 1 is when the hpc reviewed the document previously we didn't have an adopted article 10 and 11. with articles 10 and 11 and year 25 hearings on the details of those planning code amendments, there is a lot of policy changeers in there that could serve the element and be reflected in the element that we should probably revisit. also the one other thing with the spur report, the spur heritage task report has a lot of great recommendations that we all agree with can help improve the historic city's preservation program and take those into consideration when we are considering these policies. this is just a refresher. this is part of sue's presentation just to give you some context of the general planning. we have about 10 different elements. the preservation element will be one of those. once it's adopted and as you know these elements are high level visionary best practices sort of document where every decision the department or commissions make or any part of the city of the family makes has to refer back to the

this is just a way for us to keep a tally and graphic manner of the hpc's accomplishment over the past several years or since the work program was last visited. it includes individual buildings and districts. it's a variant article designation. as part of this report, each quarter, you will also receive this appendix. this appendix contains two items. one is a graph that will show you graphically just how we are performing in terms of designations from literally the beginning of the program to current day and we have broken that down into landmark districts and individual designations. it maybe more useful to have this graphic produced every year rather than a quarterly basis given the process it takes to move these items through designation process. we are happy to provide it during each, as part of each report if you would like to. and we felt it would be helpful for the commission to understand a variety, the other projects that are in the cue as part of the survey teams day-to-day work. a lot of this work has to do with community initiated historic context statement for other proje

intend on doing something right for his home, our stand would pretty much be that we would like to see hpc and planning really a adopt a very supportive posture that reaches out to people who have good intent and aids them through the process and encourages them . you know, again, sadly the conjectural comments we got is that's not where we are right now and moving this as we re-examine the our interpretation of the secretary of interior standards is our goal. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, i'm jim, i serve on the city hall preservation commission, along with two of my colleagues who are here today. i'm delighted to be here. as supervisor wiener said this is a very important exercise and requires a lot of work and should involve as many people as possible. i think you're extremely fortunate to have doctor michael as your presenter. there's probably few people in the country that has this expertise to do the job as well and i hope you will keep him in some capacity to provide you with additional input over the course of the work. i was a member of the federal advisory commission