To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body
SFGovAccessibility
Seal of the City and County of San Francisco
City and County of San Francisco

 

SAN FRANCISCO

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION

 

Meeting Minutes

 

Hearing Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

 

 

12:30 P.M. 

 

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION

 

Regular Meeting

 

 

 

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:         Wolfram, Martinez, Matsuda, Damkroger, Chase,

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:           Buckley, Hasz

 

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT CHASE AT 12:38 P.M.

 

STAFF IN ATTENDANCETina Tam – Preservation Coordinator, Pilar LaValley, Moses Corrette, Matt Weintraub, Linda Avery – Commission Secretary

 

 


 

 

A.         PUBLIC COMMENT

 

SPEAKERS:

Kathy Howard – Friends of Music Concourse, re: She repeated her request that HPC agendize Golden Gate Park (GGP) Beach Chalet Soccer Field on 4/7/10 HPC hearing. Recreation and Park like to move the project for a final approval in April as soon as Planning Department has finished their review.

Peter Warfield – Library Users Association, re:  He was disappointed that 1) the HPC did not question further Deputy City Librarian comments on the libraries’ update and 2) the Library did not come with materials presented in advance; 3) He remarked on the change of plan for library shelving; 4) He questioned the 1.3 million the Library added to the Park Branch renovation budget.

Ed Yarbrough – Member of the Historic American Landscape Survey Northern California Chapter, re: He urged the HPC to agendize GGP Beach Chalet Soccer Field project at the west end on 4/7/10 HPC hearing. Some of the Recreation and Park’s proposal would radically affect the character of the landscape.

 

B.        STAFF REPORT AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

 

Preservation Coordinator Tam:

Status of Masonic Auditorium – The project didn’t come to HPC for these reasons - the building is determined through a Section 106 process; eligible for listing on the National Register; however it is not a local landmark nor located within a historic district.  Therefore, the building is considered a potential historic resource for the purposes of the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA).  When Planning Staff review the project in late 2008, it was solely for interior restorations and did not cause significant adverse impact to the potential resource.  As a result, it was given a Categorical Exemption (Cat Ex).  The Conditional Use authorization was approved by the Planning Commission on March 4, 2010 with a 4 to 2 vote.

Review schedule for GGP Soccer Field Project – Planning Department on February 16, 2010 requested Recreation and Park Department for additional information and has yet to hear back from them.

 

The Certified Local Government Annual Report has been completed.

 

C.        MATTERS OF THE COMMISSION

 

1.         President’s Report and Announcements

 

Commissioner Chase:

Follow up on 1/15/10 Mayor’s Disability Council (MDC) hearing attended by Commissioners Damkroger and Chase– at the hearing they stated to the MDC they would bring back to the HPC a request to develop a policy consistent with universal accessibility and the Secretary of Interior Standards for potential historic resources and landmark buildings.  MDC Co-Chairs Ross Woldall and Jule Lynn-Parson offered a letter to HPC indicating they are willing to begin the process.  Commissioner Chase would like to agendize a discussion to develop a policy statement for the HPC on universal accessibility.

Follow up information from Deputy City Librarian, Jill Bourne - she submitted to Commissioner Chase information she omitted from 3/3/10 HPC hearing presentation.  It was available in this hearing for the public.

Staff’s conflict with Sunshine Ordinance – He read into record an email from Sue Cauthen that the Education Training and Outreach Committee had found HPC minutes has been complied with and the matter is closed.

Golden Gate Park Soccer Field – He had a discussion with the Director of Recreation and Park about information provided to Ms. Tam and the Planning Department.  There was a request to hear this item and HPC would like to agendize it on April 7, 2010.  However, the date is predicated on receiving the information soon enough for Planning Department to make a determination on the course of action.

 

2.         Consideration of Adoption:

            a.      Draft minutes of Regular Hearing of January 20, 2010

            b.      Draft minutes of Joint CPC/HPC Hearing of January 28, 2010

            c.      Draft minutes of Regular Hearing of February 3, 2010

                     (Items 2a, 2b, 2c are continued from the Regular Meeting of February 17, 2010)

            d.      Draft minutes of Regular Hearing of February 17, 2010

 

 

ACTION:         Approved as corrected – January 20, 2010 draft minutes on page 5, Disclosure – Commissioner BuckleyWolfram; Approved as drafted minutes of January 28, February 3, and February 17, 2010.

AYES:             Wolfram, Martinez, Matsuda, Damkroger, Chase

ABSENT:        Buckley, Hasz 

 

3.         Disclosures

            Commissioner Martinez talked to Peter Lewis about Mission Dolores Survey.

 

4.         Commission Comments/Questions

Commission Wolfram – He suggested to agendize a hearing to discuss revisions and to develop some language to Articles 10 and 11 so they are in compliance with Proposition J.

Commission Damkroger – She would like a CEQA discussion in April and asked if the Chair would appoint a subcommittee of commissioners to develop discussion items important to the HPC.  (A Policy Subcommittee was established.  Commissioners Damkroger, Martinez, and Wolfram serve as members, and Commissioner Matsuda as committee ex-officio.)

Commission Martinez – 1) HPC needs time to discuss a wide range of public policies such as CEQA, handicap accessibility. Proposition J, local interpretation of Secretary of Interior Standards and to find a way to codify their interpretations; 2) He asked for plans Jill Bourne had promised him; 3) He asked whether Golden Gate Park is a potential historic district. Preservation Coordinator Tam responded it is already a designated National Registered District; 4) He asked whether Planning Department has a policy on when a project in the potential historic district would be brought to the HPC for review and comments; 5) He asked what to do with incomplete projects in the work program under the Landmarks Board.

Commission Chase – He mentioned several times to his fellow commissioners to look into the rules of procedures but has received nothing.  He had encouraged to agendize a non project related hearing before and asked if it’s possible to agendize a hearing for comprehensive issues of interest to HPC without any project scheduled on the calendar.  Preservation Coordinator Tam responded that a possible date for a non-project hearing can be in either in May or June or a special hearing on HPC’s off-day, but not in April.  Commissioner Secretary Avery added if it is in April, she would need to check with City Hall for room availability.  Otherwise, Planning Department has room and a 15-day notice is required.

     

D.        CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE

 

5.         2009.1180TZ                                                                   (T. Sullivan: 415/558-6257)

Amending San Francisco Zoning Map ZN01 to change the zoning of Block 0241, Lots 011 & 012 – 680 California Street, aka Old St. Mary’s Church – from Chinatown Mixed Use District to C-3-O and amendments relating to Planning Code Section 128 to require that proceeds from the sale of transferable development rights from certain Transfer Lots be spent on the rehabilitation and maintenance of the Transfer Lot property.  Ordinance that would amend the San Francisco Zoning Map ZN01 to change the use district of 680 California Street, aka Old St. Mary’s Church from Chinatown Mixed Use District to C-3-O and to amend Planning Code Section 128 (Transfer of Development Rights in C-3 Districts) to require that the proceeds of transfer development rights from a Transfer Lot which contains a designated landmark pursuant to Article 10 of the Planning Code be spent on the rehabilitation and maintenance of the landmark building; making environmental findings and findings of consistency with the General Plan and priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval.

(Proposed for Continuance to April 7, 2010)       

 

SPEAKER:     None

ACTION:         Motion to recuse Commissioner Chase

AYES:             Martinez, Matsuda, Wolfram, Damkroger, Chase

 

ACTION:         Item was not heard and to be continued to April 7, 2010 regular hearing

AYES:             Wolfram, Martinez, Matsuda, Damkroger

RECUSED:     Chase

ABSENT:        Buckley, Hasz 

 

E.         REGULAR CALENDAR

 

6.         2009.0901A                                                                      (P. LaValley: 415/575-9084)

679-685 3rd Street, - east side of street between Townsend and Brannan Streets, in Assessor’s Block 3788, Lot 015.  Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for removal of infill at ground floor openings, installation of new storefront systems in existing openings, repair of stucco at ground floor, and installation of new tenant signs.  The subject property, formerly known as the Gale Building, is a contributing structure to the South End Historic District and is located in a SLI (Service/Light Industrial) District with a 50-X Height and Bulk limit. 

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval

 

SPEAKER:     None

ACTION:         Approved based on recommendation.

AYES:             Wolfram, Martinez, Matsuda, Damkroger, Chase

ABSENT:        Buckley, Hasz

MOTION:       M0054

 

7.        2010.0069U                                                                    (M. Corrette: 415/558-6295)

Bayview Hunters Point, Area B Survey - Consideration to adopt, modify, or disapprove the Historic Context Statement.   The area under study consists of  the blocks generally bounded by Cesar Chavez Street to the North, US 101 to the West, San Mateo County to the South, and the San Francisco Bay to the East. Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt the Historic Context Statement: Bayview Hunters Point, Area B Survey.

 

SPEAKER:     None

PRESENTERSLyla Husein – SF Redevelopment Agency, presented background of project.

                       Tim Kelly – Kelley & VerPlanck, introduced the team

                        Christopher VerPlanck – Kelley & VerPlanck, presented context statement and a slide show of the survey

 

ACTION:         Approved with modifications, correction of typos noted by commissioners, and dates noted by staff.

AYES:             Wolfram, Martinez, Matsuda, Damkroger, Chase

ABSENT:        Buckley, Hasz

MOTION:       M0055

 

8.         2010.0140U                                                               (M. Weintraub:  415/575-6812)

Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey - Consideration to adopt, modify, or disapprove the community-sponsored survey. The survey area is generally bounded by Market Street to the North, 20th Street to the South, Dolores Street to the East, and Church/Sanchez Streets to the West.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt with Modifications the Mission Dolores Neighborhood Survey.

 

PRESENTERSErica Shultz – Architectural Historian with Carey and Company, presented brief overview of the survey components and the methodologies used to make evaluations and conclusions.

SPEAKERS IN FAVOR OF A LARGER HISTORIC DISTRICT:     Peter Lewis – President of Mission Dolores Neighborhood Association (MDNA); Marius Starkey – Resident of Mission Dolores (MD); Cynthia Aldridge – Resident of MD; Ted Olson – Resident, City Guide, and Board Member of MDNA; Rafael Mandelman – Resident; Stephen Haigh – Property Owner in MD; Arnie Lerner – Resident and Board Member of MDNA; Lucia Bogatay; Jonathan Lammers – Architectural Historian and Resident; Jack Gold – Executive Director of SF Architectural Heritage.

 

ACTION:         Adopted as modified (please see attachment or the link to Mission Dolores transcript on Commissioners’ deliberation of this item.)

AYES:             Wolfram, Martinez, Matsuda, Damkroger, Chase

ABSENT:        Buckley, Hasz

MOTION:       M0056

 

NOTE:            The HPC felt there is a need for Planning Department to discuss with the community and project sponsor about resources, criteria, time tables and expectation for the initiation of a district.  It is not appropriate to establish a deadline given the financial condition but would encourage the discussion to begin for the fruition of a district nomination come forward to HPC.

 

 

ADJOURNMENT:  3:49 P.M.

 

The minutes was proposed for adoption at the Regular Meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission on Wednesday, April 21, 2010

 

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              Wolfram, Martinez, Matsuda, Damkroger, Chase

ABSENT          Buckley, Hasz

 

 

Last updated: 7/8/2010 2:34:47 PM