Commissioner Vice President hyland. Here. Commissioner hasz. Here. Commissioner johns. Here. Commissioner matsuda. Here. And commissioner pearlman. Here. Commissioners we expect commissioner johnck to bean cent today. First is members to address the commission with Public Comment and with respect to agenda items the opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. Each member of the public may address the public up to three minutes. I have no speaker cards. Does anybody member of the public wish to speak on a non agendaized item. Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. Very good commissioners. Department matters. Item 1 directors announcements. Good afternoon commissioners. Tim Frye Department staff. The president s report was included in the packet and happy to answer questions or forward questions to the director should you have them. Seeing none item two review of Commission Planning department and announcements. Good afternoon. Tim frye planning staff. No report from the commission. They had a very short hearing last week and the only other item i wanted to bring to your attention was university mount ladies home is at the Land Use Committee next week and the department will be presenting on your behalf. That concludes my announcements. Moving on commissioners that places us under commissioners matters. President s reports or announcements. No report or announcements. Very good. Item 4 consideration of draft minutes for the october 7, 2015 minutes and the october 7, october 7 arc minutes and i have one correction. Its noted that commissioner pearlman was present for the meeting and he was absent and commissioner hasz was here in his stead. Any other comments or corrections . Does anybody in the public wish to comment on the draft minutes on october 7 minutes of the Historic Preservation commission and the Architecture Review Committee. Seeing none i will close that. I do have a motion . For the minutes . Move to approve. Thank you commissioners. On that it commissioner hasz. Yes. Commissioner johns. Yes. Commissioner matsuda. Yes. Commissioner pearlman. Yes and Committee President wolf bofl. Yes. That passes 60 unanimously and places you on item 5 comments and questions. Any questions, comments, disclosures seeing none we will move on . Commissioners that places under for considerations proposed for continuance. Item 6 for 2014. 1315coa at 135 townsend street certificate of appropriateness is proposed for continuance to november 18, 2015. If there is anybody any of the commissioners wish to pull this from the continuance calendar . Okay. We need a motion to continue. Does anybody in the public wish to comment on this proposal for continuance . Seeing and hearing none we will close Public Comment. I do have a motion to continue . I motion to continue. Second. Thank you commissioners. On that motion. Commissioner. Yes. Commissioner. Yes. Commissioner yes. Commissioner yes. Commissioner president wolfram. Yes. So moved. That passes 60 unanimously and next is number 7 at 2015007714coa at 900 north point street also known as Ghirardelli Square. Certificate of appropriateness. Before i hear this item i am working for a client on this item for Ghirardelli Square and i need a motion to recuse myself. Move to have commissioner wolfram recuse himself. Second. Thank you commissioners. On that motion to recuse. Commissioner wolfram. Commissioner hasz. Yes. Commissioner johns. Yes. Commissioner matsuda. Yes. Commissioner pearlman. Yes. Commissioner hyland. Yes. So moved that passes 60. Gfn commissioners. I am from the Department Staff. Before is a certificate of appropriateness for Ghirardelli Square which is designated as city landmark number 30 and is listed on the national and california registers. The proposed scope of works ifs on alterations to the Apartment Building and the plaza near the larkin street entrance and the proposal includes replacing stairs at the south and west facades adding ada lift at the south facade, adding tenant signs and mechanical equipment including mechanical louvers and other equipment at the roof. For the planters the planter adjacent which are the existing planters are from the halprinera planter redesign of the 60s. Adjacent to the planter on larkin street gate the stairs currently [inaudible] planter will be removed and with a new stair and ada lift with a concrete wall. A new concrete bunch is added to the planter and original planter is retained to the extent possible with the focus of retention at the eastern portion of the planter and another planter near the chocolate shop building and altered over the years those walls will be removed and replaced with a concrete bench and planters will have new plantings. Staff finds that the proposed Work Commission as recommended is conformation with article 10 and the secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation. Staff finds that the project replace none historic features with new features and new benches and plant i guess and ada lift in the plaza in a matter that is compatible with the property. Staff recommends approval of conditions of conditions and ceiling and new signs and for removal of the proposed awning at the south facade entrance. Since packets were submitted to the commission we have gained a better understanding of the existing and proposed treatment for the terrace ceiling and would like to amend the condition related to this feature by removing the requirement this is a finished solid ceiling and adding language regarding the treatment of new fixtures and associated conduit when installed on this ceiling. We recommend that Condition One from your draft motion be revised to read as follows that new light fixtures are fully recessed in the ceiling and the conduit is minimized as possible and painted to match the ceiling. Plans for the terrace ceiling will be provided for review and approval as part of the permit application. The two conditions in the draft in the motion are recommended without any revisions. No Public Comments have been received since packets were submitted. Staffs preliminary recommendation for this project is for approval with conditions. This concludes my presentation unless there are any questions and i believe the project sponser also has a brief presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions from the commission . I do have a question. Thank you. On the fake brick and make sure i understand all the locations. It says filling in a door. On the west facade theres the west wall of the original building ground floor was previously removed in the 1960s and reconstructed we think in the 80s, 90s. Were not 100 sure so within that reconstructed wawm there are four openings. Two are full height and two are more window size openings, so one of those full height openings would be partially in filled and with veneer brick to match the surrounding and in that partially opening a window would be installed. Is there any veneer brick already there . Yes. For the rest of the wall its veneer brick. Got it. Thank you. The project sponser would like to make the presentation. He has ten minutes. Good afternoon commissioners. My name is a lis scats and the architect for the project. We have with us brian and ben who are the Landscape Architect james hardy is also here and the owner of Ghirardelli Square and we have patrick o costo the restaurateur for the proposed work for the restaurant. We were here last february when we presented alterations to the building and the adjacent terrace. That project is well under way and working closely with planning. Lavalley have worked with the mock ups of the site work. Were here to present improvements to the Apartment Building and the location of the building over to the left of the site. The Apartment Building was constructed in 1916 for a apartment for the day manager and night watch man for the buildings. The building was in the 1960 shown on the right hand side when converted to a restaurant. This work included using the larkin street facade as the entrance to an under ground garage and facing the plaza audio not clear protruding wings. The building was altered in the 80s through an installation of the store front when converted to retail and entry at the west facade and glass enclosure on the bottom left was placed above the garage. The steps at the west facade were constructed at that time. The project will reintroduce a student use for the building. The store front will be removed and the steps. The main entry is located on the facade and accessed through the stairs and brian will talk about that in a minute. It will have concrete that matches the halprinera planter paving. I want to emphasize with the store front it is masonry openings while not originally theyre like the original facade openings will be seen for the first time in decades. Mineral changes are proposed for the south facade and provide the ada entrance for the restaurant. Primary changes are the stairs and awning that brian will talk about. Signage for the restaurant will be minimal. Signage proposed for the [inaudible] and existing roof over the store front and at [inaudible] level. And signage at that location and there is currently scarring where the sign was removed. We will replace that and minimize the sign so cover only the area that has been scarred. We are proposing an awning at the ada side and reduced to a minimum to provide shelter over the door and the configuration will be very simple and minimal. The name of the restaurant will be at the squirt of the awning. The sign has been reviewed and installed in a way so brick is not damaged and at mortar joints and asking for approval of this awning. Two banner signs will be installed at the larkin street facade on the none historic enclosure above the garage. We believe this is a sensitive alteration that i think brs back an important building into use. The building has been vacant for several years and excited for this rehabilitation and excited for the vitality it will bring the square and brian will now come up. Good afternoon commissioners. I am from hok. We serve the project as the Master Planner and Landscape Architect, so i wanted spend a couple of moments walking you through the exterior improvements proposed for the project. These are the existing photos of the site. You can see the upper left, the stair exists that faces on the Central Square that was a later addition. On the right side there is a problem and the haphazard stair added along the way and sliced through the halprinera planter and plantings and disrupted circulation flow and one of the first things that you see on Ghirardelli Square off of larkin street so we need to do something more than an exit stair. Below lower left you can see a condition when you walk in from larkin this is what you look at and we figure there is a better way to do this and this is a 3d model up in the air birds eye of the facility and the space and the lateral stair and the planter off of larkin. What we propose i will start with kind of the area upper left in the drawing that faces the fountain. This is the patio using concrete and help the esthetic. The verticals will have formed concrete and in keeping with the halprin esthetic and when you blur your eyes and zoom out youre seeing a rationale plan which we think is very much was halprin was about. Everything has a purpose and no stairs that cut through and interesting and this would enliven the plaza edges and lower right. This is where the stair will be reconfigured and the ada lift for the building and currently needs that and were restoring utilizing the existing halprin planter, what remains and extending what has been lost and demolished along the way with the same details and bench and everything at the upper plaza which you approved previously and this builds on the sets and guidelines froms previous. Planting its hard to see huwere proposing a olive tree and theyre one of the best parts of the square from a landscape perspective and we think adding a fifth would be a good thing and salty and tolerant. They make good sense here. This is the reconfigured 3d and see the stair exists to the space and laterally so you can stand out there and see this and we need more seatings and not about chairs and halprin was about these furnishing [inaudible] audio not clear and on the right side of the image near larkin you can seat stair, the elevator the lift i should say and planter and all rationale and purposeful and going back to what halprin established. He got it right so thats where i will close early. We look forward to answering your questions. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioners have any questions . Any member of the public wish to public on this agenda item . I will bring it back to the commission then. Close the Public Comment. I think its a very appropriate design and fits in well and i am ready to make a motion to approve as designed with the neanded condition amended Condition One. Second the motion. Thank you commissioners. On that motion then to approve with conditions as amended. Just for clarification so the recommendations are that are the awning design be brought through to the planning staff for further development. Okay very good. Commissioners on that motion to approve with conditions with amendments. Commissioner. Yes. Commissioner hasz. Yes. Commissioner pearlman. Yes. Commissioner hyland. Yes. Commissioners so moved and passes 50. Commissioners that placings you for item 8 for case three, the van ness brt Station Design for Civic Center Landmark District review and comment. Good afternoon commissioners. Shelly from the preference staff. I am here to present the van ness avenue bus Rapid Transit project. Its before you for review and comment and coming back a month from now for the certificate of appropriateness hearing, so the brt project as we will refer to it calls for two centered dedicated bus lanes separated from traffic on van ness avenue on lombard street and Mission Streets and passes through the district and the improvements proposed along the alignment require approval for the certificate of appropriateness. Some of the improvements include a bus station at mccallister street, lighting and planting and traffic medians. The Architecture Review Committee reviewed this project 2014. Its been a year and recommended design improvements to achieve better compatibility with the landmark district and i have attached the comment summary to your packet. Its attachment a. Due to the budget and management constraints not all of the arcs recommendations could be accommodated and the department requested review by the full commission to review the options that sfmta is exploring and comment on the appropriateness for the changes of the landmark district. The city as you remember recently prepared a landscape inventory for the district which has been incredibly useful for analyzing the appropriateness of the project and some pages from the inventory are exerted in the packages and attachment b where you find maps and photos and contributing features of the district along van ness and staff has reviewed the project and do the guidelines of the secretary of the interior and landscape and hierarchy of projects within land scaips. The first four deal with existing historic features so i wanted to note along the van ness corridor within the Historic District and include 34 trolley poles and light standards and modified in 1934. Another contributing feature are the median trees trees located in the median. Theres also a portion of brick paving in front of high school of commerce which is a contributing feature. There are four fire hydrants installed in 1909 and associated with the 1906 fire and earthquake. There are many granite curves lining the sidewalk of van ness avenue although many portions have been replaced and theres one fire box dating from 1899. The project does propose to remove all the trolley poles along the corridor along the district. They can no longer serve to hold the wire system that serves the bus Rapid Transit system. Theyre also in Poor Condition and dont meet standards for lighting so sfmta will go into more why they not in the scope and the removal appears to be justified. The project would remove the flowering and gum tree in the median and replace with a similar species which has a very similar form and height. The project would salvage or replace in kind the brick paving and any granite curves damaged this time and keep the fire box within the guidelines. That brings us to treatment six which deals with new or modified features. In the case report i listed all of the you 92 or modified Landscape Elements followed by planning staffs evaluation of compatibility and i want to point awe few in the presentation. Youre welcome to ask about the others but i wanted to point out the features were recommending a change in design approach so first would be the station platform, the actual bus station located in the median. Staff is recommend being that the recommending its designed with granite curves and match the ones in the district did we otherwise find that the design itself is compatible with the district. The station shelters the bus shelters located on the platform. Staff has recommended using a shelter with a lighter and finely detailed framing system and with a simple flat or pitched roof as compared to what were referring as the Clear Channel design and has the seismic wave roof and industrial structural system industrial looking. Sfmta has proposed two alternatives for consideration but staff didnt believe theyre of quality that we would recommend for approval. Regarding the sidewalks staff is recommending that new g