the california preservation foundation. and i'm here to support the nomination of andrew wolfrum to the preservation commission. i've worked with andrew over the past 10 years in various capacities, through the california preservation foundation's work and initiative. i know andrew well. he has over 30 years experience in the architecture and design, and has worked on some of san francisco's most notable buildings, the ferry building, the former pacific telephone building, the san francisco city officers' club, and the city landmark, which was reused and an unused health facility, and converted it to over 150 units of housing. andrew is active in a number of organizations aligned with his professional interests, including having served on the board of trustees of the california preservation foundation. because of his experience and his acumen, the california preservation foundation appointed andrew to serve on a number of committees, including a recent appointment to serve as the co-chair as the california preservation design awards, and in this capacity is responsible for coordinating the work of a jury of desi

bringing that to mind because as we're hearing, there is a multiple of agencies, the arts commission, the historic preservation commission, the planning commission, the multimodal access, all of them having something to say. so it's hard to keep track of these. but unless the disability council and disability-related groups and advocates weigh in and say, hold it, you've got to think more carefully about the safety of the materials you're using. and especially i'm going to suggest this council consider some simple letter saying we appreciate the efforts, but you really can't think of brick as realistic, as something to be replaced with brick, with clay that is baked and if you don't call it brick, it's still clay that is baked. i'm going to suggest you think of some simple line that it's unsafe when wet. we've had a relatively wet winter. i mean, myself and others haven't been as mobile just because of all the rain and the slippery sidewalk surfaces. if you can come up with a simple letter that can be transmitted soon to the historic preservation commission, the planning commission, that can help, because too

bringing that to mind because as we're hearing, there is a multiple of agencies, the arts commission, the historic preservation commission, the planning commission, the multimodal access, all of them having something to say. so it's hard to keep track of these. but unless the disability council and disability-related groups and advocates weigh in and say, hold it, you've got to think more carefully about the safety of the materials you're using. and especially i'm going to suggest this council consider some simple let

not did take any final actions on the items mentioned. >> tim frey, here to share a few items from yesterday's commission hearing. first of all, the historic preservation commission provided review and comment on the accessory dwelling unit planning business and tax regulation code amendments that i believe that are on your calendar today. the commission has a number of questions related to how the performance criteria that are proposed by staff for historic buildings would be implemented and they are -- they have continued that item after providing some general direction and support for the program. they did continue the item to have further conversation about how the department would review ministerial grants for landmark properties at its next hearing. the commission also unanimously approved a certificate of appropriateness for the site on the northeast waterfront landmark district. this is also a port property. the project has been in the department for a number of years and apparently after some negotiations with the tenant and the port was finally ready for its hearing before the h.p.c., and the a.r.c. reviewed the project twice and they were ha

i just want to say for the record that this historic preservation commission did review this and did recommend it, so this is just an issue with regard to the planning code section 302 findings. i didn't want anybody to get the impression that the historic preservation commission which has jurisdiction over some of the these issues did not review it. they did. >> president yee: okay. so any other comments? seeing none, then, let's take item 51 first. can we take this item same house, same call? seeing no objection, then, this item, this is passed unanimously, first reading. [gavel]. >> president yee: item 52, colleagues, there's been a motion to make an amendment by supervisor haney. is there a second? seconded by supervisor walton. can we take the amendments without objection? without objection, then, the motion passes for amendments. colleagues, can we take this same house, same call for item number 52 as amended? okay. supervisor haney, are you speaking still? okay. then without objection, then, this item 52 is -- this ordinance is passed as amended. [gavel]. >> president yee: -- o

we also had the historic preservation commission review the legislation. we talked to tenants rights organizations. we are not encouraging demolition. this is new construction and getting the a.d.u.s inside of that. thank you. i will hand it over to planning staff. i am going to leave. thank you for your time and effort today. we will keep the conversation going. >> thank you. planning department staff. before i begin i want to note two quick things. first, lee hepner from supervisor peskin's office is here to speak. he will speak after the staff presentation, and second staff took this ordinance to the historic preservation commission yesterday. they adopted the recommendation for approval of the ordinance with modification as proposed by staff. i will start with general overview of the a.d.u. program as of today. the current legislation allows a.d.u.s added to existing residential buildings in zoning buildings. divided into two programs in san francisco. since summer of 2017 there have been two planning code sections for a.d.u.s as programs. first is cal

all five businesses received a positive recommendation from the historic preservation commission. after reviewing the applications and the recommendations from the h.p.c., staff finds the businesses have met the three criteria to qualify for listing on the legacy business registry. there are five draft resolutions for consideration by the small business commission, one for each of the legacy business registry applicants. note that a motion in support of the businesses should be a motion in favor of the resolutions. in the resolutions, please pay close attention to the core physical features or traditions that define a business. once approved by the s.b.c., the businesses must maintain these physical features or traditions in order to remain on the legacy business registry. for bi-rite market it's grocery store, for la med, it's restaurant featuring med terranean quisine. for let's do wash, it is laundromat, for make out room, it's bar, and for mon sing noodle, it's noodle company. this concludes my representation. i'm happy to speak. there are business representatives present who w

on may 22nd we will be giving the board of appeals an overview of the historic preservation's commission's review process around certificates of appropriateness and major permits. this largely came -- this request largely came about during the pioneer monument appeal and board of appeals wanting a better understanding of how this commission operates and how you weigh certain decisions in terms of when they affect a character-defining feature and when they do not. more on that later but i did want to give you the heads up that the may 22nd, calendar date has been scheduled. another important event, tonight the department will be hosting a mills act work shoshop in the ro district and commissioner black will be attending to provide support to staff that will defensive an overview of the mill's act programme should the strict be interested in pursuing the programme along with designation this upcoming here. and then we also provided -- or i'm not sure, i'll check with the commission's secretary. we asked for the order addressing the julius castle superior court decision from the friends of mo

in addition to the hearing at the historic preservation commission, there will be a public hearing on april 4 in the planning commission. that is one way the public can provide comments on the draft eir to the planning department. the other way is writing. but you can come in person to city hall and give your comments to the planning commission directly. at 5:00 p.m. on april 15, that comment period will close. we expect to have final certification of the draft eir this fall. we're targeting october of this year. in addition, we have other community meets that are coming up. the project has a community working group that will meet on march 25. we also are going to civic design review, a committee of the arts commission, will be presenting the schematic design on monday, march 18. and then we'll be going back in june and in october when we have 65 and 95% design. and then other project approvals will come after final certification in the fall. so we get project approval from our own director as well as from the municipal transportation agency's board, the mta board. our goal is to adve

the design at the request of some members of the board of supervisors and the -- i forget which commission, the historic preservation commission, and we ran that design contest. all of that took a while, so that was the source of one of our extensions. and then, most recently, we had trouble getting scheduled at the various review committees that needed to review the new design, so that was the source of the second extension. so going forward, we're pretty much ready to bring the new contract to you, and you will have the opportunity to review it when it's introduced next month. >> chair fewer: okay. so i'm not comfortable passing this out of committee at a sixth amendment when i don't have any information about the terms of the new contract at all. i'd like to make a motion to move this to continue this item to the call of the chair. can i take that without objection? supervisor mandelman? [inaudible] >> chair fewer: supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: so just before you vote -- i'm fine with that. i just wanted to ask a couple of questions, and i did meet with mr. spitz before this meeting. i was under the im

president hyland of the san francisco historic preservation commission. it is my pleasure and my privilege to appear buffer to speak about the application for the legacy business registry. it is my duty and responsibility to speak

on march 6, the preservation commission approved appropriateness. since publication of the packet, staff received an additional letter of support. i have copies of that. the department recommends that the commission grant the request for cancel use authorization and approve the project with conditions finding it necessary in compliance with the planning code. this concludes my presentation. >> president melgar: thank you. hi. project sponsor? >> yes. my name is -- i'm the executive director. i wanted to apologize. i think some of our people in the beginning, oversight, it's our first time on the consent agenda. some people had to go. i will try to be as fast as possible. i'm the executive director of 906 world cultural center, a new nonprofit organization that is located in the our lady of guadalupe church. here is a time line for the building's history. as you can see, it was church for about 100 years providing a safe and inviting place for the community to come and worship. as a new nonprofit, we have a new platform. our mission is to use this his

the resolution is an action taken by the historic preservation commission on september 5th, and that is passed, and that is exhibit "c" in the second file. mr. starr? nope? hold on one second. >> thank you. i'm just here to say that the h.p.c. did get this item on september 5th, 2018, and appear the proposed change for 175 golden gate to category 3. on december 7th, 2018, the planning commission heard the zoning map and general planning code changes and voted unanimously to approve them. i'm also here for any questions. thank you. clairemont how much is a t.d. r. worth these days? >> it has gone down in value, i think. clairemon>> chairman: there is a little more than 30,000 of square feet, so it is worth about $800,000 of value. in exchange for permanent preservation of this category 3, or soon to be category 3 building. is there any public comment on items one and/or two? mr. badner, welcome. >> thank you. larry badner, badner planning, representing the project sponsor. i have nothing to add, except for i think it is on your calendar at the full board tomorrow afternoon, one of the

president hyland of the san francisco historic preservation commission. it is my pleasure and my privilege to appear buffer to speak about the application for the legacy business registry. it is my duty and responsibility to speak on benkyodo company. it's been a mainstay fixture in japantown for 113 years founded by grandfather and his sons and family, brothers, rick and bob. who carry on the family business which is the last remain business in san francisco that still makes japanese food. generations of japanese and japanese-americans passed through the portals of benkyodo to buy these traditional foods of which over 1000 pieces are handmade daily. japanese-american family menu -- not only traditional dish to be placed on the table but also to be purchased and carried as gifts with visiting families, friends, relatives, religious services both joyous and somber. always a social and customary must. in recent years customer base has changed the shop includes multiple asians and others and probably number of japanese-american customers. these include visito

the historic preservation commission her the applications on february 6th and made positive recommendations to the small business commission. each applicant has been provided with a staff report. the application case report from planning department staff and a resolution from the h.p.c. there are copies on the table. item three a is armstrong carpet and linoleum company. the business or the step -- was established in 1946. originally at 2123 film or street. the founder was chuck armstrong who started the business upon completion of his service in world war ii. armstrong carpet and linoleum company provides quality custom flooring and window coverings which are expertly installed. the company performs all jobs of quality, artisanship and excellent customer service. in 2002, they moved to its present restingplace at 369 west portal avenue. the legacy applicant is a co-owner who is dedicated to expertise in all surface flooring and window coverings, and the attention to detail within the customer experience. item three is a new world market the business is an international grocery, delicatesse

it would include planning department, staff and interns, a survey advisory group, the historic preservation commission, obviously, as well as technical support from the gety conservation institute and graphics and, of course, the public. so for our survey advisory group, we're envisioning two components, which would be that one we would have a core group of six to eight members that would meet on a regular basis and would be established for the duration, essentially, of the survey process, including the commissioners that were identified here as liaisons to the survey. , consultants from the preservation field and we would have a rotating membership that would change as we move from phase to phase and neighborhood to neighborhood. furthenose membersthose would bn neighborhoods that were this that survey phase or historical societies or communit stakeholdr however it maybes sense as they move along. so some of the rotating members aren't going to want to be involved for the duration, which we'll talk about in the future here. and then for some of the public outreach and what we're anticipating from the

it would include planning department, staff and interns, a survey advisory group, the historic preservation commission, obviously, as well as technical support from the gety conservation institute and graphics and, of course, the public. so for our survey advisory group, we're envisioning two components, which would be that one we would have a core group of six to eight members that would meet on a regular basis and would be established for the duration, essentially, of the

applications 3-a and 3-b were submitted on february 6th and heard by the historic preservation commission on marc. application 3-c submitted february 20th and heard by h.p.c. on march 20th. for all three applications h.p.c. made positive recommendations to the small business commission. for each applicant you have a staff report, draft resolution, the application, and a case report from planning department staff and a resolution from h.p.c. there are copies on the table for the public. item 3-a is curry senior center. the non-profit organization originally called north of america et health council was tableestablishedestablished in g mental health, meals and other social and community services to seniors. located at 315 and 333 turning street. the senior center was formed in response to dire living conditions in the tenderloin neighborhood. francis j. curry was director of the san francisco department of public-health at the time. he and his colleagues, civilian johnson and dennis stone found the living conditions for seniors in the neighborhood deplorable with lack of access to medical c