sucre. that's my understanding. so i just want to mr. papadopoulos, were not ignoring jury that just not something we can consider as part of our decision. we can't force project sponsor to add or even not subtract. we can ask them to change their decision on affordable housing. >> commissioner richards >> so with the motion is is, [inaudible/off mic] i guess with the motion is an unmasking the motion maker and second, you are asking the project sponsor to come back with getting rid of the great on the private roof deck, eliminating the stair penthouse for the private roof deck and try to do a half for many dozens of times we've asked for this. hold back the public decks from the edge of the building and then also work on the townhome design -mezzanine. >> let me clarify that i'm not just asking for the removal of the great. i'm asking for a matching light well did at this moment in the drawing the light well is not established as existing conditions and in order to really see how that light well matches, and kisses on matches, the propo

sucre. that's my understanding. so i just want to mr. papadopoulos, were not ignoring jury that just not something we can consider as part of our decision. we can't force project sponsor to add or even not subtract. we can ask them to change their decision on affordable housing. >> commissioner richards >> so with the motion is is, [inaudible/off mic] i guess with the motion is an unmasking the motion maker and second, you are asking the project sponsor to come back with getting rid of the great on the private roof deck, eliminating the stair penthouse for the private roof deck and try to do a half for many dozens of times we've asked for this. hold back the public decks from the edge of the building and then also work on the townhome design -mezzanine. >> let me clarify that i'm not just asking for the removal of the great. i'm asking for a matching light well did at this moment in the drawing the light well is not established as existing conditions and in order to really see how that light well matches, and kisses on matches, the propo

sucre. that's my understanding. so i just want to mr. papadopoulos, were not ignoring jury that just not something we can consider as part of our decision. we can't force project sponsor to add or even not subtract. we can ask them to change their decision on affordable housing. >> commissioner richards >> so with the motion is is, [inaudible/off mic] i guess with the motion is an unmasking the motion maker and second, you are asking the project sponsor to come back with getting rid of the great on the private roof deck, eliminating the stair penthouse for the private roof deck and try to do a half for many dozens of times we've asked for this. hold back the public decks from the edge of the building and then also work on the townhome design -mezzanine. >> let me clarify that i'm not just asking for the removal of the great. i'm asking for a matching light well did at this moment in the drawing the light well is not established as existing conditions and in order to really see how that light well matches, and kisses on matches, the propo

sucre to have a response to commissioner johnck squashing? >> sure.alysis we did conduct in evaluation by rochelle is a cultural landscape that is part of the background study that are basically factored into the report. >> i do not see that in the package at >> it might not have been in the pack but it's in appendix basically within the reports. so we are happy to send it forward to you. >> yes. i think was part of the link. there's quite a few widows. >> okay. >> i think in terms of the wayfinding and integration the hpc once brought a comment to focus the public interpretation or insurer the era and the time frames of the sites evolution is discussed in the public interpretation from good i think that's entirely appropriate. >> thank you. either and their comments commissioners on the adequacy? to refine the eir to be adequate the mitigation to be appropriate finance? that's what we are here for good i'm seeing a lot of nodding heads. commissioner pearlman >> i have a number of comments. i think the wayfinding common is an interesting one relative

sucre to have a response to commissioner johnck squashing? >> sure.part of the technical analysis we did conduct in evaluation by rochelle is a cultural landscape that is part of the background study that are basically factored into the report. >> i do not see that in the package at >> it might not have been in the pack but it's in appendix basically within the reports. so we are happy to send it forward to you. >> yes. i think was part of the link. there's quite a few widows. >> okay. >> i think in terms of the wayfinding and integration the hpc once brought a comment to focus the public interpretation or insurer the era and the time frames of the sites evolution is discussed in the public interpretation from good i think that's entirely appropriate. >> thank you. either and their comments commissioners on the adequacy? to refine the eir to be adequate the mitigation to be appropriate finance? that's what we are here for good i'm seeing a lot of nodding heads. commissioner pearlman >> i have a number of comments. i think the wayfinding common is an i

this work was all reviewed with rich sucre who i knew from when i was on the heritage issues committeee was with paige and turnbull. he okayed the conditional assessment with the windows. basically, the project sponsor followed the direction that this experience preservation planner had given them and thought they were doing the right thing. during when i looked at the project, i actually went out to the site and i knows the limits that are ordered ashley did not match the drawings they would have to replace those. that the columns that you had approved for the entry were victorian type columns, round columns and they should be changed to square columns which are more in the craftsman style. basically, working with preservation staff, have come up with what is before you now, which i feel they feel, is a true project that meets the secretaries standards for reconstruction because we know what was there before. it was documented and that's what you have before you. john duffy who is the project architect was hereto also insert any questions you have technically about the project, but i