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
April 04, 2007

FINAL ACTION MINUTES

OF THE

SAN FRANCISCO

LANDMARKS PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD MEETING

CITY HALL

1 DR. CARLTON B. GOODLETT PLACE, ROOM 400

April 4, 2007

12:34 P.M. ROLL CALL

FOR FULL LANDMARKS BOARD CONSIDERATION

BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Cherny, Damkroger, Maley, Martinez, Street

BOARD MEMBER(S) ABSENT: Chan, Dearman, Hasz

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Mark Luellen, Preservation Coordinator; Moses Corrette; Sophie Middlebrook; Craig Nikitas; Tara Sullivan-Lenane; Sonya Banks, Commission Secretary; Marlena Byrne, City Attorney

PUBLIC COMMENT

None

REPORTS

1. STAFF REPORT AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

Mark Luellen, Preservation Coordinator:

iThe amendment to Article 10 to include language regarding the designation of privately owned interiors was heard at the Land Use Committee and Economic Development Committee on March 19th; it was recommended for approval and has its first reading at the Board of Supervisors on March 27th.

iThe Mills Act application for 1080 Haight Street was introduced to the Board of Supervisors on March 20th. The Budget and Finance Committee will hear this application on a date to be determined.

iThe Cat-Ex for 2130 Golden Gate (aka 350 Masonic) was rescinded and there was no appeal hearing before the Board of Supervisors on March 27th.

iThe Market/Octavia Plan adoption is schedule to be heard before the Planning Commission on April 5th.

iOn April 11th, @ 5:30 p.m. at 44 Castro St. (formerly Davies Hospital auditorium),the Department will be holding a public meeting on the progress of the Market/Octavia survey. Topics for discussion will include a summary of work to date, what are the State Inventory Forms and what they mean, methodology for selecting properties for intensive survey, historic context statement overview, and how that will be used in the survey.

iThe Landmark Designation report for 55 Laguna has been submitted to the Planning Department for review and will be heard before the Landmarks Board on April 18th.

iThe Mills Act application for 1735 Franklin Street will be heard before the Planning Commission on April 19th instead of April 5th. The Review and Comment for the Draft EIR for 55 Laguna will be heard on April 19th.

iThe Landmarks Board's regular hearing of May 2nd has been cancelled to accommodate the Planning Department's move.

iThe Planning Commission's regular hearing for May 3rd has been cancelled but the Commission will hold a special meeting on May 31, 2007, to accommodate cases as necessary.

President Maley asked if there were any information on S.F. Architectural Heritage's request regarding 807 Franklin St.

Mark Luellen, Preservation Coordinator

i807 Franklin St. is in the Redevelopment Agency therefore the Planning Department has no jurisdiction. There was a enforcement compliant filed in 2005 regarding illegal commercial use due to the number of cars parked on the property.

Vice President Cherny stated that one of the murals at Rincon Center still had visible damage by water; it is not just a matter of restoring the murals but making sure the leak that caused the damage is repaired.

Mark Luellen, Preservation Coordinator

iThe Rincon Center murals have beenexamined and there is a bid for the restoration.

2. PRESIDENT'S REPORT AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

None at this time.

3. MATTERS OF THE BOARD

Maley

She re-confirmed that the Planning Commission will be discussing the Market/Octavia Plan on April 5th.

Damkroger

She asked if there was an update or any information on 1776 Post Street. She questioned if the Redevelopment Agency had established policies regarding 1. Have a better list of consultants; 2. Use of the Planning Department's CEQA procedures.

Board Action

It was moved by Board Member Damkroger (seconded by Street) to designate President Maley to attend the Planning Commission hearing regarding the Market/Octavia Plan. If President Maley is unable to attend the hearing Board Member Martinez will attend as an alternate. The vote was unanimous.

AYES: Cherny, Damkroger, Maley, Martinez, Street

NOES: None

ABSENT: Chan, Dearman, Hasz

4. LANDMARKS WORK PROGRAM 2005-2007 UPDATE

Board Member Martinez – We now have someone working on the reports for the Transit Shelters.

ACTION ITEM(S)

5. APPROVAL OF THE MARCH 21, 2007 DRAFT ACTION MINUTES

Board Action

It was moved by Board Member Street (seconded by Martinez) to adopt the draft action minutes with corrections. The vote was unanimous.

AYES: Cherny, Damkroger, Maley, Martinez, Street

NOES: None

ABSENT: Chan, Dearman, Hasz

NON-ACTION ITEM

7. (C. NIKITAS: 415/558-6306)

Planning Department staff will present an informational presentation on Planning Code Section 128 Transfer Development Rights in C-3 Districts.

Speaker(s):

Amy Brown

Beth Mori

Edward Suharski

Pastor Charles Kullmann

Mary Ghisolfo

Charles Chase

Ezra Mebsey

Gee Gee Platt

Andrew Stringer

Board Comments

A Board member asked if Planning Code Section 128 would be amended. One requested that the city respond to S.F. Heritage letter. A Board member asked the TDR amount for the Veteran's building, and for all 5 buildings together. One suggested language that states this is a City policy to sell TDR when no other funds are available for particular buildings (recommended defining the parameter in the future). One suggested a comprehensive study be conducted on the supply of TDR's. A Board member asked if there was a timeline for the repairs? One encouraged the Planning Department to provide detailed information about the history of use on TDR's. Recommended a policy protection and a better way to accommodate these building that may qualify for TDR. A Board member suggested agendizing a discussion on  what can be done to permit the Old St. Mary's and similar buildings to claim TDR's in the future . A Board member encouraged the Planning Department to provide a presentation to the Landmarks Board after their report is completed.

Tape No.: 1a & b

ACTION ITEM(S)

REVIEW AND COMMENT

8. 2007.0181F (T. SULLIVAN-LENANE: 415/558-6257)

420-430 29TH AVENUE, St. Peter's Episcopal Church, east side of street between Clement and Geary Blvd. Assessor's Block 1460, Lot 015. Request for Review and Comment to demolish a one-and-half-story Gothic Revival church constructed in 1913 and two auxiliary buildings, and the construction of a new 19-unit plus 1-managers unit, group housing facility for developmentally disabled adults facility plus a new church building. 420 29th Avenue, St. Peter's Episcopal Church, was included in the Unreinforced Masonry Survey (UMB) with a rating of I, or of Highest Importance, and has a rating of 3S, or individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The church is located within an RH-2 (Residential, Two-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

Speaker(s):

Alice Miller

Shannon Dodge

Steve Combs

Bob Herman

Patrick Andersen

Jill Thompson

Kristy Feck

Charles Chase

Ty Robinson

Board Comments

A Board member asked if a Planning staff member had performed an analysis on how alternatives C1 and C2 (of the demo viability statistics) compared with Article 10 definition of demolition. C-2 is not a preservation alternative and should not be available. Suggested re-analysis of the demolition with better data. A Board member feels that it should state that this project is a seismic upgrade alternative because it's definitely not a preservation project. One questioned why the need for additional APE forms. A Board member asked if there were any objection to the project by the community. One questioned if the State Historic Building code was taken into consideration when the scheme was developed. If the State Historic Building code was not used that would be a major problem and should be stated in our letter. A Board member requested that the MOH submit their proposal in a timely manner to the Landmarks Board and did not appreciate the rushed process for this project. A Board member recommended endorsing staff recommendations. Members of the Board provided suggestions on the mitigation measures: MOA-Pg. 4 there is a typo (district) –the recommendation that the document include a rectory (may not be necessary) – HABS documentation needs to be strengthened (a short format history should be included for the written data to include more discussion on the significance and the historic context of the church) – Item 3 the Documentation Report and Xerographic copies (suggested getting approval from the preservation coordinator prior to a occupancy permits) – Recommended a qualified historian oversee the interpretive display and is approved by the preservation coordinator to ensure it is written correctly – On the ESA report pg. 20 the Salvage Plan (suggested stating make the items available for reuse). There should be an alternative that retrofits the church and try to provide some housing on the parcel. Suggested adding language to the MOA that states that the demo permit for the church building is not issued until conformation that the funding for this project is in place. The Board feels that the alternatives have not been adequately studied because the Board is unsure if the State Historic Building code was used to analyze the upgrade of the building. A Board member feels that the Planning Department should say whether there is a preservation alternative. Needs documentation as to how the structural upgrade was analyzed. The Landmarks Board was troubled by the lack of evidence that the State Historic Building code was used and the lack of information about the ability to retrofit the church. Whatever is left from the 1.6 land lease that remains should be used to support the church restoration.

Board Action

It was moved by Board Member Damkroger (seconded by Cherny) to submit a letter with their comments regarding this project to the MOH. The vote was unanimous.

AYES: Cherny, Damkroger, Maley, Martinez, Street

NOES: None

ABSENT: Chan, Dearman, Hasz

The following agenda items were heard in this order: #11, #10, then #9

9. (M. CORRETTE: 415 558-6295)

Citywide Survey Work Plan

An update on the Planning Department's Citywide Survey Work Plan encompassing surveys of the Eastern Neighborhoods Plan Areas and Japantown.

Speaker(s):

None

Board Comments

A Board member asked if an intern would be supporting the staff member in preparing the survey. Suggested establishing an advisory committee to help with the context statement. Goals should be set so that the statement is completed, so by the end of 2 years a clear and fully developed outline should be completed. A Board member feels the work plan is great. The Citywide Context is a major tool and very useful. On page 12 instead of  Architectural Significant Buildings recommended changing to  Architectural and Historically Significant Buildings . Recommended that each context be very clear and well defined and requested that the Landmarks Board reviews the outline. Asked if the Planning Department were seeking funds from the Preservation Fund Committee for an outside consultant?

Tape No: 2a & b

CONTEXT STATEMENT

10. (M. CORRETTE: 415 558-6295)

DRAFT HISTORIC CONTEXT STATEMENT FOR SOUTH OF MARKET. For the purposes of this context statement, South of Market's boundaries are defined by the areas within and along Market Street (north), Mission Creek (south), 1st Street (east) and Division / 13th Street (west). Request the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board, review, comment and consider adoption of the draft historic context statement for South of Market.

Speaker(s):

None

Board Comments

A Board member found the report to be impressive. Suggested more information on page 71  Institutions . In the introduction into this category there are comments on various types of institutions and there is a brief development of government and religious buildings and not development of the other type of institutions that are mentioned in the introduction, which do exist in the area. On page 2  Geographical Area do not agree with the following statement  Page & Turnbull did not survey this part of Showplace Square which in the most part consist of a single building suggested clarification. Recommended in the future when preparing context statements defining where to start the survey. Suggested ending each section of the context statement with a discussion of what are the resources that relate to this context. On page 32  Commercial Development there is a paragraph that focuses on commercial development and then discusses commercial ballparks; suggested putting commercial ballpark under another heading like Entertainment or Recreation. Recommended numbering the headings. On page 47 suggested ending the context statement with good remaining examples that relate to the context. On page 52 instead of the heading  The Oakland Bay Bridge suggested  Public Works Project and then sub-sections  The Oakland Bay Bridge and  South Van Ness Avenue. Suggested adding a heading for  Notable Buildings . On page 59 under property types, suggested good examples of property types that relate to the context for each one. A Board member do not like the use of the word  ghetto suggested using another word. Suggested using the addresses instead of the location name.

Board Action

It was moved by Board Member Cherny (seconded by Damkroger) to endorse the Context Statement with the condition that their comments get incorporated into the final document and the Board will review within 6 months. The vote was unanimous.

AYES: Cherny, Damkroger, Maley, Martinez, Street

NOES: None

ABSENT: Chan, Dearman, Hasz

Tape No: 2a

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS

11.

2007.0012A (S. MIDDLEBROOK: 558-6372)

333 Dolores Street, Assessor's Block 3567, Lot 057. Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness to rehabilitate St. Joseph's Hall, with no change of use or increase in existing floor area. The project proposes improvements to the building's accessibility including entrance doors, exterior paths-of-travel, and replacement of non-historic aluminum slider windows. The proposal also includes removing an existing exterior fire escape, and to replace it with an interior exit stair.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

Speaker(s):

Mark Jensen

Gayle Tsern

Rick Ackley

BOARD ACTION

It was moved by Board Member Martinez (seconded by Street) to approve the Request for a Certificate of Appropriateness with the following conditions that further study is needed on the structure of the trellis. The vote was unanimous.

AYES: Cherny, Damkroger, Maley, Martinez, Street

NOES: None

ABSENT: Chan, Dearman, Hasz

Tape No.: 2a

ADJOURNMENT: 4:20 P.M.

Respectfully Submitted,

Sonya Banks,

Recording Secretary

ADOPTED: May 16, 2007

N:\LPAB\MINUTES\m4.4.07.doc

Last updated: 11/17/2009 9:59:43 PM