. >> president wolfram: thank you. any other speaker wish to comment on the item, if so, please come forward. we'll close public comment seeing none. i have actually one -- this a minor comment but one thing that jumped out, the notice, posters. and the requirement for a notice poster every 25 feet, that means opt ferry building you would have 64 notice post-ers. i'm wondering if that one should be changed to a building of 25 feet and less, one poster. 25 and 50 feet, two. i'm concerned about the damage to the paint on the ferry building, we have 64 posters on that building. maybe that one could be modified to be a little more flexible. commissioners, comments? i think these are great improvements. i'm thrilled we're doing stuff to streamline the process. i think these are all going to be really helpful, so it's a really great package and impressive presentation. thank you for such a clear presentation. commissioner johns. >> commissioner johns: this is fantastic, i don't know what the difference is between printing --

. >> president wolfram. commission commissioner. and commissioners, first on the agenda is general public comment. at this time, members of the public may address the items on interest to the public within the subject matter and jurisdiction of the commission and with respect to the agenda item, your comments will be addressed when we reach that item on the agenda. each member may wish to address the commission for 3 minutes. does any member wish to speak on n non-agenda item? seeing none, we will close public comment. >> director's announcements is item one. >> the director will be joining us shortly, but i am happy to forward any questions you may have to him for answer at a future date. >> an item two, review plast events of the planning report, staft report, and announcements. >> a few items to share. at last week's planning commission hearing, the planning session unanimously support ed the certification of the central draft eir as well as the amendment to adopt the central area plan. and just as a matter of housekeeping, i wan

thank you very much. >> president wolfram: thank you. any other speaker wish to comment on the item, if so, please come forward. we'll close public comment seeing none. i have actually one -- this a minor comment but one thing that jumped out, the notice, posters. and the requirement for a notice poster every 25 feet, that means opt ferry building you would have 64 notice post-ers. i'm wondering if that one should be changed to a building of 25 feet and less, one poster. 25 and 50 feet, two. i'm concerned about the damage to the paint on the ferry building, we have 64 posters on that building. maybe that one could be modified to be a little

thank you. >> president wolfram: very good, commissioners. the motion was with the staff modification regarding the stairs. on that motion commissioner black? [roll call] so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously, 6-0. commissioners, we have already heard item 9 which will place us on the final item 10. mills act program. for your review and comment. >> good afternoon, commission, shannon ferguson, planning department staff. the item before you today is a review and discussion of proposed modifications to the mills act program. enacted in 1972, the mills act legislation allows owners of qualified historic properties who actively participate in rehabilitation to receive property tax relief. owners enter into a 10-year contract with the city and contracts are automatically renewed each year. contracts transfer to subsequent owners as well. property owners agree to rehabilitate their property. san francisco adopted the mills act program in 1996. in 2012, the process was made more predictable and affordable for applicants. the city

. >> president wolfram: we do. on that motion, then commissioners to approve the landmark dez -- >> one moment, we have -- >> i think the mike is on, i wanted to reiterate the motion is with the proposed amendment that the staff brought up about the stairs? we should be specific about that so we can prepare it for the board. thank you. >> president wolfram: very good, commissioners. the motion was with the staff modification regarding the stairs. on that motion commissioner black? [roll call] so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously, 6-0. commissioners, we have already heard item 9 which will place us on the final item 10. mills act program. for your review and comment. >> good afternoon, commission, shannon ferguson, planning department staff. the item before you today is a review and discussion of proposed modifications to the mills act program. enacted in 1972, the mills act legislation allows owners of qualified historic properties who actively participate in rehabilitation to receive property ta

. >> president wolfram. commission commissioner.nd commissioners, first on the agenda is general public comment. at this time, members of the public may address the items on interest to the public within the subject matter and jurisdiction of the commission and with respect to the agenda item, your comments will be addressed when we reach that item on the agenda.

it was pointed out at the historic preservation commission by president wolfram that that could be a little bit tricky or difficult or excessive to meet for perhaps excessive large street frontages. he mentioned the ferry building, and he pointed out that it might be advisable to look at ways to give us more flexibility when a particular site or structure is not appropriate to have the posters go on there in a kind of one size fits all way, so that's certainly something to discuss. in addition after the ordinance -- after the recommendations from the department were passed along for the ordinance, we learned of state laws that actually do require newspaper notification in certain cases and actually do require 300 foot mailing in certain cases for c.u.'s and variances. the newspaper is for legislative actions and certain types of rezonings. the department's recommendations remains we should approve this ordinance so the code would set the standard requirements, minimum requirements, and any time that state law dictates otherwise, we obviously follow what the state law is, and that wou