>> good afternoon i'll bring

the hungs to order. >> good afternoon regular hearing welcome to the meeting for october 1, 2014, please be advised please silence all electronic devices. and when in any way, shape, or form. >> president hasz commissioner wolfram commissioner honda commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman commissioners first on your agenda is general public comment 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 poovshg povshg the item is

reached in the meeting. each member of the public may i have no speaker cards. >> any member of the public wish to speak please come up to the podium. >> good afternoon. i'm mike buehler of the san francisco heritage i know to direct your attention to an article in the chronicle regarding the legislation that is introduced audio supervisor campos to introduce the legacy businesses in san francisco and create a legacy in san francisco heritage has been working with the supervisor in crafting the ordinance the proposed ordinance and it will include we believe roll for the office of small business to research and investigate 30eb8 incentives for legacy businesses and provide recommendations to the board of supervisors i mentioned this, of course, as a photocopy presentation to puc

regarding our policy paper n for san francisco history we established a subcommittee to look more deeply into the issues and what the city can do i hope that the heritage can work with the commission in providing recommendations to the board of supervisors and informing that process going forward so happy to entertain any questions. >> thank you is there any public comment? please come to the podium. >> good afternoon i'm to talk about the resolution recommended the board of supervisors approval about the historic property contract that the local government would like to plan to enter contracts with the kaiser

historical proposals like myself subsequentially i had the united states senate open a bank the bank of sue u sullivan i have more than 3 hundred and 86 accounts in wavelengths and some of the agents protocol we were having problems with going to a bank and having my simple accounts some of the officers were coming behind me ask me about the business and then the corporate business and then calling the realtor i'm braced and felt dirty here let me put some money into the city to restore some of the preservation here i went by the property and an officer went to my house and

tried to make a key before the agent closed escrow that was as opposed that to be closing in thirty days but like the owners when we have legal business with the city council please feel free when you guys see me and have attorneys and someone wants to talk to me feel free to call me president obama knows about the things and michael bloomberg in new york is familiar with my cases all senators is familiar with my cases i have congressional members i ask them nicely can they open a business so i can get to my new construction so far i had like two this lady who is an officer and the buy

intuition on 205 mission avenue leah campbell says she owns my property and they're to transfer the case to germany which the securities have been changed to make a long story short she went to my historical property and changed the contractor a clerk karen and she had a banner up she removed the banner and changed the name to my building and indicated she owned it then i had other alleviations with the state. >> thank you, thank you no, no thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm desiree

smith with the san francisco heritage i want to make an announcement about an upcoming event on assort october lovingly related to the laip i latino statement with the historical society a san francisco latino fair on 10 to 5:00 p.m. at the library the latino digital archive group weighing we're going to be interest the whole day conducting interviews and have live entertainment and a concert and the band will be performing at 2 o'clock and screening a.comy film take place anothers lovingly a.m. invite you all and the members of the

public to join us thank you is there any additional public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioners there that places you under department matter are matters director's report. >> i want to mention a project you've seen in the press it might be of interest there's discussion about maintaining the flower mart we'll have discussions with the developer is that a search for ways to maintain the facility on site even if the site is developed with another use the mayor makes a strong point of saying they should do that we believe it's physically possible to do that and working with them to do it that they don't have a former application we spent e expect

that within a few weeks to be able to see but we're concerned about the issue, and, secondly, related to that we're the lastly concern just a general concern about the pdr uses in the south of market we're in the midst of doing the selma plan, which we believe the draft e.r. is out in 2016 and we are looking in the context of that plan at the possibility of a one-on-one replacement policy in the pdrs if they're required and replaced whether or not on site or off site we're looking at a variety of alternatives the trend t is not only they're they're real jobs but a real demand for pdr

space for the multiple trend in the last couple of years growing small businesses in the city and having a hard time finding it we're looking at that in the central selma plan just wanted to give you that update thanks. >> commissioners questions for the director and i have a question for director ram. >> when the flower mart when was it started post world war ii. >> steve might know that. >> it's been before world war but in the current location 50 years. >> there's no decision about landmark status it has a lot of history. >> tim frye planning staff it's been surveyed so those finding about come to you prior to our

reviewing the eir. >> seeing no other questions we'll move on. >> item 3 past review of the reports and announcements. >> commissioners tim frye there was no practicing those hearing last week in obtain certain thought you jewish holiday i have a couple of items one you're probably away jim glover voted the tax bill the 1899 i want to reiterate our disappoint in this and the city family including our partners at the port came out with a historic tax credit we'll provide support to the heritage california preservation foundation and others to hopefully move something forward again in the

folsom year i passed anti earlier a postcard outlining an event as part of the latino cultural district with the san francisco arts commission and our visit in the neighborhoods program the event is basically a stamp collecting event where folks what walk a around and sclek stamps by various are artists within the latino community the event on october 26th and, if any. i encourage you to attend i think a lot of us will i want to bring to your attention two items in our packets pine street the pine street project those developers he sent a response that was issued at our last hearing and also, we included a copy 69 completed landmark designation

report to bring something forward for your informational purposes to understand while we have a designation report we're working with the prove or disprove on are concerns with locally designating that property and finally to follow up on mr. boourlz comments about the cam possess legislation in the paper today, the planning department has been part of the meetings continuing its an interesting idea and we're going to continue to work with their office and i also put supervisors or commissioners commissioner hyland and commissioner matsuda in contract with their officer as our newly appointed members of the subcommittee so hope to rope in into the conversation with the

proposals concludes my repot and happy to answer any questions thank you seeing no questions. >> commissioners that places you in commission matters decorating report. >> no one. >> the draft minutes for the review committee september 17, 2014, hearing and the regular historic preservation hearing for september 27, 2014, commissioners any changes seeing none, we'll open this up for public comment we'll back to you, commissioners. i move it be adapted. >> on that motion of september 27, 2014, be adapted for the minutes commissioner

johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman commissioner wolfram president hasz so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 68 to zero and passes you on item 5 commission questions or comments. >> commissioner pearlman i just wanted to disclose i had a conversation with andrea with supervisor cohen's office on the topic. >> commissioner matsuda. >> ditto and commissioner johns. >> at the same and also what the supervisor. >> thank you very much seeing no other discloser or comments. >> commissioners that places you in consent calendar are considered to be routine may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests removed from the consent

calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 6 case no. 2014 h for 55 market street requests for a major permit to alternate i have no speaker cards. >> would any of my commissioners request to pull this off consent calendar any members of the public seeing none. >> i move to approval the consent calendar. >> on that motion to approve item 6 commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman commissioner wolfram anyway's so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and places you under our regular calendar for 19 t planning code amendments for the landmark building and pdr districts.

>> good afternoon. i'm with the planning staff glad to be back to talk about that once again, i'm to introduce andrea to talk about refresher where we were and what changes since and ask my colleague tim frye to speak that the progress in the puc and other pieces of legislation and fill in any details in the legislation as well thank you. >> thank you, ann debris with supervisor cohen's office i wanted to thank you this for the thoughtful discussions the first time this was heard and update you on a number of the changes we are relating to be made to the legislation which you see in our packet some of them relate to the specific items we've discussed at the commission specifically around requiring the approval of a historic

structures report and the planning commission to consider those planning report in their conditional use authorization in looking at the concerns we had talked about both from this commission and other community are stakeholders we did make the requirement that any conversion of the historic office or any conversions to office space in the pdr h and r be authored by the planning commission so that gave the planning commission the opportunity to consider the factors we've discussed including tenant relocation in addition to the historic structures report and recommendations e recommendations of this committee and tried to delineate what they'll be focused on

including the review of the historic report and the documents vs. what the planning commission will be focused on in their conditional use approval which includes the tenant relocation and appropriateness for a conversion in the neighborhood so we really appreciate the feedback you guys priority and making the same questions to the planning commission they adapt those recommendations as part of their approval to the board of supervisors and typically what we do with the motions and recommendations we work with the city attorney's office to work with the board of supervisors process sometimes additional supervisors will have additional requests but we'll need to make additional amendments but having the recommendations of any concession we have legislation pending whether the go historic preservation commission or the

department of building inspection commission we typically receive their recommendations and put them in the recommendation before you with the city attorney's office to integrate them i know that planning staff will glow the recommendations and i'll be happy to answer additional questions you have. >> commissioners tim frye planning staff as a couple of items in the draft resolution you'll see did mischievous at the last hearing issuing a letter but dealing with those mischievous we sort of stopped rethought everything and decided the resolution was a much cleaner way to express this staffs recommendation it's also in front of you if you turn to the back of the packet you'll

see that 219.2 is expanded considerably and happy to walk through this 0 step by step from a process standpoint but average that i just leave it to you if you have very specific questions or topics you'd like to cover i'm available. >> commissioners? any items? commissioner johns >> well at the last meeting i expressed some concern about essentially voting for a to approve a stick and pope my concerns have been addressed and i think this is a recommendation that we could and i think should make. >> thank you and i'll second on that as the lady mentioned she'll take our comments as

rewritten by staff and recommend to the planning commission i'm happy to support this any other questions commissioner pearlman. >> i'll wait. >> commissioner johnck. >> i wanted to say you did great work on getting this together and it is really terrifically and my question to tim we're going to have some more comprehensive responsibilities on this i'm not quite sure the words used but we'll be spending a lot of time a lot then in the past. >> yes. it definitely it is much more comprehensive we have a clear roll and more information that's required of the property owner for a need for the preservation of the building to consider those

changes so you'll, looking at one not only at the historic structures report perpetrate by itself consultant but looking at the all over change of use in performance with the secretary of interior standards. >> thank you. >> commissioner wolfram. >> maybe to understand better the proposed legislation this will basically separate the processes seems like last time we were grasping with the issue are we when we labored a building we're not talking about use but landmark is one process and go ahead and change the use that is a separate process; is that correct. >> correct previously the change of use was permitted for a landmark property now the idea to lion this section similar to

803.9 you often see it's already a landmark but needs a separate review under a conditional use authorization by the planning commission for special sdpiements. >> typically they were separate the only difference in the past in the project was not yet a landmark so the landmark was proposed at the time and there was no requirement to have the conditional use authorization it could be a situation your seeing the landmark of the building and a conditional use but in that particular case the building was not a landmark we were not clear before. >> thank you seeing no more questions we'll open this up for public comment seeing none, public comment is closed british columbia's commissioner pearlman. >> i think the fact that no

public comment is a comment in itself supervisor cohen's office has done a terrific job and to andrea let the planning commission be the planning commission so the roles are clear so we're not making social decisions about use and things like that that are not in our purview i want to commend andrea and supervisor cohen for the language and the clarity. >> commissioner matsuda. >> thank you yeah. i also would like to support this is clear in terms of the delegations between the commissions i have a practical question or procedural question looking forward way the planning code change would be for example, as it states here if it is a two or 4

story building one story of office space would be allowed so that happens so those tenants move out how is that going to be monitoring i'm curious and kind of to add to that after that particular office tenant moves out it will be hard for a pdrs type of industry to come back in after it's been converted to office so i'm wondering how that will pan anti. >> tim frye with the planning staff the tendency zoned by use not tenant so once the change of use will come before you guys and the planning commission they'll offer a change of use and based on the circumstances hopefully, there be another place for the tenant in the course the pdr tenant moves out

the land is about the use it's permitted to be an office we don't mind which office because of the economics one goes to office they tend to stay office because office pays more than pdr that's why those buildings are a preserved in increments so the understanding is this is a permanent change but this legislation proposes removing the ceiling instead of changing the whole buildings to office. >> i guess i'm also in interested how we can remember the original use of that pdr a company and whether that be by designating plaques or some kind

of i don't know signage to let the people in the historic building to let them know pdr are in usage i'm kind of thinking out loud you don't know i don't want people to forget how important it to the city. >> tim frye i think that's an interesting idea especially, as this commission mandates the imprisonment so it maybe not looking at the types of office but the architecture and the community and the neighborhood and awning the folks that were employed there so that would be something if you want to include that an interpretative mandating be in there we'll entertain that. >> steve planning department

staff maybe that happens as part of the landmarking process that speaks what's insides the only this legislation said you're going to have a pdr building at the end of the day and plans have changed it's hardly to say this moment in time is the more and more most important time we make the landmark at this time say this is the reason and it wouldn't be included in this legislation. >> commissioner johns. >> thank you well, that suggestions that we accommodate what upper thinking about in the landmark that's appeals to me but what i really was going to say before that came up i move that we adapt the resolution that's been presented to us. >> second >> thank you

commissioner wolfram before we. >> if we can correct a spelling of mandating in the resolution not a good thing (laughter). >> that's not - i move that we adapt the resolution after a spell check has bun done (laughter). >> if we can call the vote. >> nothing further. >> i have a comment. >> oh, yes commissioner johns arrest commissioner comment commissioner matsuda i like our idea i want to make sure in the minutes that we consider taking a discussion of pdr issues relative to landmarking that we consider. >> well, it's a good time we'll have the historic report with the landmarking that's a good time to - and i want to make sure it's