. >> thank you, commissioner wolfram. so, commissioners, on that motion to approve with conditions option a specifying that the paint condition is about the finish, not the color, on that motion, commissioner hyland, yes. commissioner johnck, yes. commissioner johns, yes. commissioner matsuda, yes. commissioner matsuda, yes. commissioner wolfram, yes. commission president hasz, yes. item 11, case 2015-017, amendments to the building code, building facade inspection and maintenance and establishing a fee. >> good afternoon, commissioners p la valley, department staff. proposed ordinance would add chapter 16e to the building code to require initial inspections, periodic inspections, maintenance and repair of the facades of buildings that are 5 or more stories. under the proposed ordinance the facade includes all areas of the exterior of the building except horizontal roof areas. each building within the scope of this ordinance shall be subject to an initial facade inspection with submital of the first such reports for build

. >> commissioner wolfram. >> i have a couple of questions one what's the dress shop diminished in 1984 is that when that happened. >> that was i think that happened the terrace building or the gallery store i can't remember. >> the dress shop you can see it in the photograph. >> has the owner considered rebuilding that. >> nate's that's not part of the project. >> have you met that the mayor's office on disability. >> we've not yet. >> i'll encourage you to do that typically it's not seen favorably so i'll encourage you to do that as quickly as possible. >> thank you. >> commissioners no other questions we'll open up for public comment is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm the president of the cocoa homeowners heritage property over and above this i wanted to voice our support for this project we think this will enhance the overall experience at interdell square and have more vibrantcy in that location. >> is there any additional public comment seeing none back to you, commissioners. commissioner pearlman. >> thank you it

arrest commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman commissioner wolfram and president hasz so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on item 7 excuse me. for case no. 2014 a at gardell jury this is a certificate of appropriateness. >> i have a disclosure the firm i work for has completed relevance a different work on gardell square and looking for the same owner and talked with the attorney i need to recuse myself if it's not the same project. >> thank you good afternoon, commissioners for the department staff a certificate of appropriateness and has a national register with a scope of the work with the terrace plaza and the ground floor of the facade of the mustard building it includes the following replacement of existing paving with concrete pafrz american people a pedestal system and reposting the lawrence public concrete finish with a 67 inch band of light colored concrete and the corners at the north wall and the planter to reconfigure the planter to committed new walls of the east and south and to install a ne

commissioner wolfram, yes. commissioner president hasz, yes. >> that motion passes unanimously 7-0 and places on you item 9. >> thank you for all your work on this. >> case 2013-01546 to 1564 market street project. >> good afternoon, my name is cis kern, i'm with the environmental planning division of the planning department. this as jonas just said this is the hearing on the draft eir on the 1546 to 1564 market street project. the draft eir was published january 27 and the hearing before the planning commission was scheduled for next thursday, the 12th of that, it will be continued to the 19th of february. the hearing today is to receive public comment as well as your commission's direction in consideration of comments on the historic resources impact on the project. those comments will then be addressed in the written response to comments document on the eir we will not respond to those comments today. i am available if you have any questions about the environmental review process for this project and otherwi

wolfram and wondered if you could respond too. if touch upon the resources, the study but what about the question of consistency when you see the historic preservation commission has been inconsistent in terms of its principles to one side. do you think that's an issue or it has happened before? >> if we have been here two years ago i would say that was a very serious issue but it's not two years ago. it's now and we don't have those problems. in the past people had an entirely unhealthy interest in other guy's issues. they wanted to redesign projects on the fly and that lead to i think chaos for everybody and that doesn't happen anymore. we have tried to be extremely consistent and predictable. >> that's great to hear. could you give examples what happened as of two years ago? what were some of the issues? >> yes, one of the ugliest ones -- well, there was the redesign on the fly of what used to be the uc extension center where the windows kept getting moved around which is -- i thought was bizarre. we had a particularly difficul

commissioner wolfram, yes. and commission president hasz. that passes unanimously 7-0 and places you on items for continuance, item 7,, 978-98guerro street is moved for continuance. >> seeing none, open for public comment. any member of the public wish to speak on this item? seeing none, we will bring if back to commission. >> i move to continue. >> second. >> on the motion to continue as proposed, commissioner hyland, yes. commissioner johnck, yes. commissioner johns. commissioner matsuda, commission president hasz, so moved, that passes unanimously 7-0 and places you on item 8, twais 2015-000747crv, proposed department budget and work program. this is an action item today. >> good afternoon again, john ram with the department. just brief intro durxes, we are here today to ask for your support in reming approval of the budget to the planning commission. as a reminder we reviewed this with you a few weeks ago. there are some slight changes from what you saw two weeks ago, primarily due to the, when we first sent you the memo two weeks ago we

point out there's this other aspect to maintaining facades that i don't want to - >> commissioner wolfram. >> i have a question for staff when the planning commission states of an eir their certifying the design and the appearance of a project are they like the way the deems looks at or other spakdz of that are we mixing up something that's not related to an eir but more to the design of the project. >> that's correct commissioners generally a certification of an eir is fold by the entitlement it go into much more detail about the design detail what you're referring to. >> for the facade retention in a way didn't relate it will have a significant impact not in terms of the significant impacts it is the same as a non-preservation alternative and more of a design issue that doesn't relate to the eir at all but relates to the design that is more input from the staff and wondering whether we think about the policy is a separate policy document that we set back to the planning department regarding the approval of the projects that have integrated our opinion about it whether or not there's thi

first andrew wolfram. andrew wolfram is a historic preservation architect and comes to this position with a deep understanding of both the technical aspect of preservation, the challenges, and the opportunities that present themselves in historic preservation in san francisco. his experience with the california preservation foundation, his involvement has been deep, and has been ongoing for the last 10 years. he has served on our conference program committee, on our education committee. he has been the recipient of several design awards. we have a state wide highly competitive design awards and he's been involved in a number of projects that received awards including the ferry building, 140 new montgomery and landmark and presidio and i remissed telling you about our foundation. we are the only state wide historic preservation organization whose mission is to advocate and educate the public and elected officials and nonprofitos the benefits of historic preservation, so we take our mission very seriously an

the main reason we bring this before you is at the request of president hawse and vice president wolfram. we had several discussions at the staff level, but also at the commission about the content and the level of detail in draft eir's. in particular the preservation alternatives presentations before this body on preservation alturn trfbs and proposed projects. president and vp felt it was important taput something down in writing that established the policy of this commission on what your expectations are when you see one of these documents come before you. so, what we have attempted to do is incorporate everything that we heard over the last couple years into some direction that you can give project sponsors and planning staff support this because it helps us during our discussions with project sponsors so we can give them a early understanding of what is expected of them, not only during the eir process and once they go brf public bodies to consider the document. with that, i would like to turn it over to lisa gibson and shell rr walk us through a poregz of the document. we are both