commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and president hasz. so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on item 11 for case 1115 >> pardon me i need a recustodials. >> i make a motion for a recustodials. >> you can recuse yourself. item 11 the union iron works i believe there's a requester inform a recall >> i make a motion to recuse commissioner hyland. commissioner hyland. commissioner johnck. commissioner johns. commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and a president hasz so moved, commissioners, that motion passes commissioner hyland is so recused. >> good afternoon, commissioners department staff. the project before you is a nomination of the national historic register it was perpetrate for the port of san francisco. in its capacity as a certified local government the city and county of san francisco is give the authority to comment on the commission and it will be forwarded to the commission of the office of historic presently. it's a maritime district 10 n

commissioner pearlman. >> i've been fretting over this for days and days i'll vote yes. >> commissioner wolfram and president hasz. so moved, commissioners, that passes 6 to one with commissioner hyland voting against. commissioners that places you on item 10 for case 2013 at 845 montgomery street for certificate of appropriateness. if people who are leaving thegr. >> commissioner. you left off open your regular calendar for case 2013 at 845 montgomery street request for a certificate of appropriate. good afternoon, commissioners. kelly department staff. the project before you is a request for the certificate of appropriateness for 845 montgomery street a building within the jackson square project of the planning code. it was constricted in 1910 and historically is known also the hotel ervin is a georgia style brick building with windows on the second and third floors and contrary front on the federal reserve. it was constructed in 23408 the penthouse and cultivated in toil. the proposed project is for the

. >> commissioner pearlman do you want to comment. >> sure i've got a lot to say. this is incredibly challenging problem. i've spent a lot of time walking that district within the last two weeks and pay checks walked up and down the streets and got a feel for the buildings in this area. i want to commend the partners. i think that the changes to the facade and the a number of our comments relative to the scaling and the rhythm & patterson of the street facade. i modifying prefer the 6th day design. i still had an e-mail and my comment was mr. van gogh designed this in the city and the columns you see on the outside of the building are fake and they don't connect to the ground even. the idea those two particular columns on either end don't support anyone is not visible only to people who know it is not connected. the visually the pattern is much more in keeping with the pattern in this district there was a lot of conversation in the staff report it never came out here about the base. some idea of base that's been added and you know, i had a few comments about it bec

the steps which are there now i don't know maybe it was commissioner pearlman said people don't sit there. and the positioning of the fountain is bizarre. it's like it was mroptd in the middle in order to seek some approval of some bureau. i think that you know, i went union square when there were box henlz and trees and it had a little bit of a forbidding elegance. i thought the fountain was elegant and it's very, very beautiful round shape and i thought it was misplaced. now as i review the drawings i think this focuses our eye on the fountain and it does that in a way that recalls the elegance of the design for union square and the enar e elegance there's still echo of that. so i thought it was handled in a completely appropriate manner. and folks here can disagree over whether there should be a stainless steel metal okay we've got the holiday building it's metal and glass and to me this reminds me, i'm not put off by the large amount of plain wall because i have watched the frankness lloyd wright building on maid even lane it's essentially a blank wall. so i find that historically and

where did it go - from the planning consultants was good they did a go analysis and commissioner pearlman's comments about adding more footage to the stairs around it should be also considered. i'm wondering i could keep going on but i think other people should - >> commissioner hyland. >> well, let's start with what i like about the project. i think the comments about the base has been addressed. the large door and breaking down the facade in the bays is successful. i personally don't have a preference brown whether it's 4 bays or 6 bays. as i said the ar c meeting i think the plaza is a - will be a wonderful space. it improves the context for the roof fountain. i don't have a particular concern about the stockton street facade with exception maybe setting precedent. some of the things that have not been addressed from the ar c ru6 address one of the scale i don't see the project have changed role significantly enough to change the scale. we could i guess debate whether it brings it down to the pedestrian level or not that's up for debate. i expressed a concern there's no corn on this buil

commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and a president hasz so moved, commissioners, that motion passes commissioner hyland is so recused. >> good afternoon, commissioners department staff. the project before you is a nomination of the national historic register it was perpetrate for the port of san francisco. in its capacity as a certified local government the city and county of san francisco is give the authority to comment on the commission and it will be forwarded to the commission of the office of historic presently. it's a maritime district 10 non-contributing resources this includes the cranes and segments & of the rails and this is for the criteria a and criteria c. under criteria a that the nationally significant for the steel house shipbuilding in the united states and it's shipbuilding and it's wartime vessels. under the criteria c it's local significant and the physical record of the trend and architecture. it began in 1884 about the construction of the shipyard and that ends at the close o

commissioner pearlman. >> i know that everyone is excited begin about the hill but - >> originally a lot of the folks who worked in the iron works lived and played in irish hills there were bars and broth eldest and you'll kinds of things it was a little neighborhood for the workers. later on it was, you know, bethlehem didn't liquor this unsatisfactoryness at their to the steps it was used to fill in a lot of the areas of union iron works that were later built up. as a feature it was both was used as you know, both supported the workers and then it was cannibaled to >> is that 5 percent or was it a significant hill there. >> there were streets yeah. >> did illinois go up and over irish hill. >> i'm not sure how the streets function i'm trying to see if any of the lubrications i have role show irish hill very well. it has streets it's hard to envision from the little bit that's now there >> no, no it was just a - and it just acknowledges it was an important part. >> thank you. commissioners any other questi

the base as commissioner pearlman mentioned is still weak. >> its a more creative solution than the one we saw previously. >> commissioner. >> i had a question about the dates i don't know how this was dealt with but on the west side the sidewalks go down so you've got a a little bit of a well, how was that dealt with before. >> previously in front of the of the store it was next to the street so there's no steps so it ties into the level of the sidewalk. >> one entrance. >> so steps open up on the east and west side so there's a flat side in front of the facade that's set back to gain access to the doors on either side. >> yes. i have some additional comments. i do think the addition of the bays has helped to break up the scale and give scale to the facade and commissioner pearlman stressed it provides more of a rhythm. and i would say that in terms of compatible if you had done a building that's modern we wouldn't like it, it's an iconic expression. so the comparability is having the big demeanors it's not repeated enough i know the 6 bays of representation helps gives a scale of heig

. >> and commissioner pearlman? >> here. >> at this time the public at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting with one exception. when the agenda item has already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the commission has closed the public hearing, your opportunity to address the commission must be exercised during the public comment portion of the calendar. each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes. ~ i have no speaker cards. >> does anyone in the public wish to speak on any item not on our agenda? seeing none, we'll close public comment. >> department matters, item 1, director's announcements. >> good afternoon, commissioners. tim frye, department staff. the d

commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and president hasz. so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on item 11 for case 1115 >> pardon me i need a recustodials. >> i make a motion for a recustodials. >> you can recuse yourself. item

commissioner pearlman >> you know i don't see any reason why the color is even an issue here. if it can't be seen from the street the owner should have some say and the light brown and gray are so close in terms of reflexion and light in the area duo i don't see where we should interfere with something donates not visible at all and at least let the owner do something and why not let me let them rope that >> i'll comment it is slightly be visible but it's so far back and it's a better alternative in color. uncommon >> i agree with commissioner. >> it's technically visible from the right-of-way. >> commissioners. commissioner johnck >> i move approval of the staff recommendations but agree the

>> yes. >> commissioner pearlman? >> yes. >> commissioner wolfram? >> yes. >> and commissioner [speaker not understood]? >> yes. [speaker not understood] has comment. >> i should have mentioned this at the beginning, but march 5th i'm not going to be here. the reason i brought it up is there an arc potentially scheduled for that? >> no, not at this moment. >> terrific. nothing else, we will -- excuse me. >> i should have brought this up, too. i was looking at our advance calendar and it looks a little slim. so, i was wondering if we could start to introduce the discussion of the historic element and talk more about that as well as the golden gate park master plan, go back to that and -- >> nomination. >> right. >> as well as talking about the application of the secretary of interior standards? >> right, that's -- >> which we haven't talked about. >> [speaker not understood]. >> [speaker not understood] yeah, interpretation. that's where the head count for the legislative action is going to take -- [laughter] >> you're right. >> any other comments? no

thank you commissioner pearlman >> my comment follows up we do need to pay attention to the fact we evolve and there are new needs you know that couldn't have been anticipated when golden gate park was designed. there wasn't a lot of skate boarding happening then. we need to balance the historic preservation with current needs and future needs is something that's inherit in the review identifying and reviewing of the promotions that happen i agree with the commissioner. >> my last question is november 2013 comes along and this element is released what happens at that time. >> when. >> when this is approved. >> what happened. >> february 27th. >> we're probably going to push that date out. >> what happens. >> it goes to the board of supervisors. >> then what happens. >> here's the thing we're coming along too years from now, maybe but this is going to be in motion what's going to be in motion i mean basically we're adding on this later does that have any change. >> of the rose. >> why don't we have a robust section. >> honestly like i said, we just heard the historic preservation we heard a

commissioner pearlman. commissioner wolfram and president hasz. so moved, commissioners, that passes unanimously 7 to zero and palace you under commissioners comments and questions >> i want to see on a future meeting for the agenda. >> we can accept anything on the agenda. >> it's the last item in the group that we put on the agenda for future hearing a discussion will state tax credits the district tax credits and what we can do to help support speak maybe get someone from the commission to talk about that. >> commissioner johns. every year the san francisco museum and historical society how old a history expo usually we get 30 hundred or more people to come and see an assembly of delays that you put on and standoff by the various historical organizations in san francisco. this year, the mr. fry as homeland that the planning department and the historic preservation commission will be represent represented; is that correct? >> i'm looking at to that booth and i highly recommend everyone attend. march the first and second >> thank you very much co

commissioner johnck pr commissioner matsuda and commissioner pearlman. commissioners first on your calendar t is general public comment. at this point the public may address the public with respect to jound agenda items your opportunity when be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to 3 minutes. i have one speaker card >> richard rothman, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm richard rothman i'm back here again talking about the building at the zoo. they opened the children's playground there so the building is now assessable and hopeful that that will be opened up and the next thing the recreation and parks department put in a grant for the historic preservation commission for the rec and park and the zoo society to do a study to see how much it would cost could renovate the building and i would hope this commission would ask the staff to send a letter of support to the historic preservation commission fund committee in support of this application. and i still building this build

. >> commissioner pearlman >> i have a technical request about the bar building that's referred to in 3 places as 3 materials as cast stone and on page 6 indiana limestone and on another page it's another material. >> i believe that the cast stone that resembles indiana line. >> so one the city attorney's. >> basically, the ordinance just talks about the district the ordinance is written as effecting any non-secondary structures in the c-3 r downtown zoning district. so if you narrow this down to the parcel then in the report it has been advised for this particular structure >> i understand that. >> and in the commission what the commission is to accomplish on page 7 of the draft ordinance it will allow the demolition and reconstruction only if the proposed removal and construction will come to several things. it says in the terms it doesn't apply in the historic district it it were affected >> okay sponsor if you folks want to get going on our presentation. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm the restrict developer with apple. i'm pleased to present our project here today

commissioner pearlman. >> i just wanted to say having worked in san francisco for close to 25 years now, this is so, so long overdue and i thank you so much. and i have questions, but that will come a it gets tested. it's not worth going into it. it's been a pleasure to work with you ~ for the few projects we worked on. >> thank you. i do want to say there's been a team of 20 planners on this project for a couple years now. we have, as john knows, been bled by an interesting staff. having planners willing to participate when they have so much on their plates. [speaker not understood]. the planning department has benefited hugely from that. this is going to be challenging, but everybody sees what it has to offer, so, we're getting there. >> thank you. >> thank you. seeing nothing else we'll move on to the next item. >> you want to call public comment. >> pardon me. so, any member of the public -- yes, howard. >>> garv, commissioners. obviously i'm here on another topic, but i'm very interested in this. it looks like an absolutely wonderful system. last year i participated in the process

commissioner pearlman and does that website include a list of outline historic buildings in san francisco >> everything you possibly want to know. >> that's one the great things people find out about their landmark if you could go to one place if you live in san francisco or are violinist and that's one great point that's one on element of the things posted under sfgovtv. we want to launch that with the prejudice >> commissioner hyland. >> is there a requirement in the c l g for the commissioners to have training. i would aware of it and when i first read it i probably could give the training and luckily i went through and found a little bit. but - >> it it - >> it's something by the need to think about. >> it's strongly recommended that all commissioners receive training to we very specific qualifications assigned to each seats so its probably for jurisdictions that don't have requirements in terms of preservation and the standards. in talking with president hasz and commissioner wolfram we are looking into formal training for that the commissioners on one of the form topics this year an