Welcome back to the thanksgiving commissioner wolfram commissioner hyland commissioner hasz commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda and commissioner pearlman thank you, commissioners first is the to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, i have no speaker card. Is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak on any item not on accident agendas if so please step forward. I dont know if this is within our purview i thought there was a couple other people here im not a public speaker so im just here because a group of people that concerned about the palace of fine arts i want you all to be aware people are building you know community to try to stop them considering a hotel, restaurant, very commercial for those spaces for the exploratorium what it is very upsetting since youre the Historic PreservationCommission Im hoping there is something that at least talk amongst yourselves is it seems wrong seems wrong on every level to make is that commercial yes. The exploratorium was a commercial enterprise but it was within the purview of education and you know innovation and kids and culture and a lot of these things has nothing to do with with us ritz carlton type of hotels or some fancy restaurant that they want to put in there possible office space sorry i should identify myself and lorraine born and raised not in richmond but really, really hoping that somebody can put a stop to what we want to do it is money, money, money money thank you. Thank you is there any additional Public Comment speak on a nonagendize item seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioners that places us under departmental matter. Commission tim Frye Department staff the directors report was in our packets ill be happy to answer any questions should you have them. Seeing none, commissioners move on to past efforts the staff report and announcements. Tim Frye Department staff a few items no formal Planning Commission report hover a few items the board of supervisors in the upcoming weeks tomorrow the millions act applications that you reviewed and recommended approval for will be before at committee tomorrow for their recommendation there is one property the address is escapes me as you recall they are that not going to recall my tax savings badges their assessed a value but asked to stay in the program proposing subsequent seismic upgrades that will be an interesting project to track over time and see if they realize a savings in the future after their major renovation project ill report to you once the full board has acted on the mills acts contract before them prior to the end of the year also the cal house proposal i marked designation has been forwarded to the clerk supervisor yee is interested in a site visit before sponsoring scheduling with with the prudent person will keep you posted and the burnett building is posted and the as small as fire survivor you recommended article 10 designation for at previous hearings and supervisor kim is looking at sponsorship for this property and in contact with her office when this will move forward but likely wont happen until the beginning of next year also wanted to mention or as a piggyback to the Public Comment i have received some inquires from the National Trust office about the proposals for the palace of fine arts the Planning Commission is reviewing at this time the main questions were about the historic status of palace of fine arts but we will certainly reach out to recreation and Parks Department and if this commission is interested in an update or more information it is a local landmark well do so in a future hearing that concludes any comments. Commissioners comments. I got a new name i keep getting a nut name on the pass us of fine arts is that under the control of the department. It is public a number of entitlements required for any proposal it there a formal alteration. If there were exterior changes correct. I think we were talking about this that requires zoning changes to allow the hotel because it is a p zoned that kind of commercial use is not allowed in the p zone. Sorry i want to add one more thing i see if the item on the directors report about the central soma open husband hocking house it might be time to come back with a briefly weve been in the eir phase for the better part of 18 months and now at the point of completing the eir so, now a good time to talk about the staff coming and reviewing that planning for as well as youll note from the directors report were in the phase were looking at the Community Benefit package so looking at it in sort of a total of finances and the revenues from land value and Affordable Housing and transportation to preservation so were looking at that whole range of issue it might be a good time to discuss that as well. Commissioner johnck and i would be interested in having a discussion on anything about comes before us that would be good thank you. Commissioners, if theres nothing further to commission matters item 3 president s report and amazements. No announcements. Consideration the drifting for the Architectural Review Committee the approval of the draft minutes for the meeting and the Cultural Heritage assets november 18, 2015, there are no speaker cards. Any comments on the minutes. Yeah. A couple on the draft minutes on item number 6 the architects name charles is blowingcy not b l o s z i e. Correct. I think he wants to be identified a question on number 8 about the van ness Rapid Transit on the action it talks about seek a straight co a about 6 months of trolley bowels but i thought we talked about the business shelter itself was something that would come back to us so that should be added both of those things. Okay. Did anybody not public wish to comment oh, sorry. Im shelly i want to clarify the 39 about the final motion the conditions concerning the bus shelter was in the draft motion the only 6 months for the trolley review that is the way it was written. Okay. Then no change. Did is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak on the draft minutes of november 18th and the fourth seeing none, Public Comment is closed and do i have a motion. Motion to approve the draft minutes for all of the particular hearings one one amendment. Technical second. Thank you, commissioners on that motion to adopt the draft minutes for november 4th, ar c and november 18th puc and minutes as corrected commissioner hasz commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman commissioner hyland and commissioner wolfram so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you under the item 5 commission questions or comments before you begin i will just mention the item following this is to be the consideration of youre schedule next year and commissioner wolfram i know you mentioned you wanted a communication about a holiday. Any comments or questions about the disclosure . Can we move on to the comments. I guessguess. You could. Take well speak, to the Holiday Gathering and weve discussed having a Holiday Gathering at the next hearing at a location yet to be determined i think well do something similar to last time we met at a bar or restaurant. Don we can go there again other locations that are preferable the legacy location. Thats good. So do you know what time is opens. At loushgs or foushgs or 5 yeah foushgs is closed for an hour or two in the middle of the day. 5 oclock 5 oclock so well add that with other notice. Yeah. Well post a notice on the website as soon as we find out ive had discussions with the District Attorneys Office and the guide should be noticed as soon as possible but if we compasses not to use 0 donning ramonas or choose another light well certainly do that fairly easily. Im i ill assume 5 oclock don ramonas otherwise sounds good. Okay thank you, commissioners any comments on the future mergers calendar . I get somewhere seeing none, commissioners item 6 the 2016 schedule for youre review and adoption we prepared a draft that notes the first and third wednesday of every month i think in the past you adopted many this fashion and needed for a holiday or if the calendar is light you will announce cancelation. Move to approve or couldnt. Okay. Im sorry who seconded that. Commissioner hyland. On that motion to adopt the 2016 Commission Schedule commissioner hasz commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman commissioner hyland and commissioner wolfram. So moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 78 to zero and commissioners that will place us under our regular calendar we have received a request to continue item 7 for the case the Affordable Housing bonus presentation due to conflicts of december 16th to youre next hearing. Do we need to take. We should take Public Comment on the continuance for the proposed continuance. Anyone in the public wish to comment on this item please step forward. The only matter you can speak to the continuance. Okay i support the continuance i have prepared and statement i had emailed to each of you commissioners im urge to be part of the process not just the presentation an impact throughout the city and hope to be back here on the 16 thank you. Thank you. Is there any additional Public Comment regarding the continuance seeing none, and back to you, commissioners. Do i have a motion to continue. I move to continue this item. Thank you, commissioners on that motion to continue this to december 16th commissioner hasz commissioner johnck commissioner johns commissioner matsuda commissioner pearlman commissioner hyland and is commissioner wolfram so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on item 8 the facade retention policy. Good afternoon, commissioners tim frye before justin begins his presentation i want to introduce you to justin his first time before the Historic Preservation commission he is guess with us for about a year and prior to coming to the Planning Department he was working with a Historic Preservation commission consulted firm in los angeles and San Francisco a graduate of the university of virginhav vira degree in ucla worked on a wide variety of projects for the locals landmark nomination and tax credit projects and currently serving as the board pointing for the northern chapter so please help me welcome in the Historic Preservation commission and with that, im going to turn it over to begin his presentation. Welcome. Okay. Good afternoon, commissioners my name is justin im here to discuss the topic of thought retention view. To start off open up with a brief outline with answering the question why having the discussion of thought retention and talk about the retention and then im going to prescribe 6 different types of you thought retention the architecture and the second a streetscape the third one is new math meets old form and facadeism at the corner anchor the facade retention from the Building Base and lastly as a hallowed out core and then on the discussion along with the commissioners to discuss the thought retention in general so why are we having this discussion about the thought retention the hpc passed a resolution requesting alternated information about the preservation and prep the Environmental Impact documents it is the languages about the thought retention with the idea youll have a more fully discussion at a traffic at a later date to start the idea of the thought retention to the commissioners so there are a number of assumptions that took place regarding the facade retention the first thing a k340e78s with the worries about of the developer and the preservationistic and the stage for preservation the public. Unique exterior features that are restored like it gets rethat accident or the detail gets refinished as part of the development the first thought is that of an architectural idea the facade details are individual standalone and the architectural value or orientationtion a remnant from an important building and one last piece of this and oftentimes a moment or important educational tool the benefit in this facade a remnant of the building that is down the road it is oftentimes meeting without a understanding of why that piece is being kept so an f we have in the account is in the last 20th century the facade of st. Paul cathedral an important reminder of the past and a popular tourist designation. In pennsylvania in 1975 the pen mature Life Insurance has a facade that was conducted in 1939 and 1902 the facade was retained as a headquarters of the building for this reason just the facade was kept moving on to new york city we have the Second Branch the United States which was actually retained and replaced in the metropolitan art in new york city the facade is within an institution and it is both a symptom of early financial growth as well as the study in greek architecture so another example of the facade is the columbia 0 in San Francisco is was alternated and reigned in 1964 as part of Golden Gateway the san franciscans produce district also in chicago the Chicago Stock Exchange which was reigned in 1973 and relocated to the art institutional of chicago in this photo the detail is one of the most important buildings as well as being an important chicago landmark and lastly we have another example from San Francisco the jig San Diego Gas station it was moved no 1991 to the corner of howard and beal and in the process of moth balling heavily within the next 5 years and that had this instance the architectural foil was able to be retained because of the smallscale as well as the youth building type of in San Francisco so the next type of facade retention that of a streetscape and the principle you have some sort of a two dimensional element as a urban design oftentimes the material quality are unique to the quality of the area and a lot of time theyre coming piled for a false avoid so the benefit you have the historic scale of a street wall recreated or maintained the drawback it ouch looks like an architectural petting zoo a unique term this is in chicago and this is where you have a combination of i wont say 10 different facades that reason retained and reconstituted along one street wall in 1994 and the retention of the thought facade was an attempt to reconstruct i construct did you urban area and as you can see the facade themselves have a rich variety of architectural detail and craftsmanship youll not see in any Development Moving Forward in the similar vein and different type of facade a new mass and form this is also vibd as payable facade in the rear mask and the guiding principle behind the facade that responses to the urban context and it is oftentimes an attempt to harmonize with the surrounding neighborhood in most cases in Larger Developments is it so still behind the facade the benefit some elements of the existing urban fabric and some massing remains but the drawback that generally this is what the public seize as preservation so as one example the International Spy museum in 2003 included the retention of 5, 6, 7 different brick and cast iron storefronts in washington as you can see from this photo a setback but the massing of the 5 brick building is able to be read and there is rich orientationtion for this reason the International Spy was retained because of street wall simmer last year this is retained as part of Larger Development and according to the Internal Revenue this facade retention was a means to make new development quote consistent and enhances the existing scale and urban design character of the area another example in chicago with the construction of the tower this is the 72 story tower with a thirty foot sent behind part of the Historic District that was significant as one of the last remaining intact of 1970s architecture in chicago to the construction of this tower brings up the viability of new construction within the Historic District according to the district definition and boundary of the Historic District the facade is technically of a new construction is not typical you, however, the district end with the one side the photographs the building is highly visible with further down the street in San Francisco we have a similar situation where you have the construction of an 8 story annexation building on Market Street that k0i7b9d with the removal of a 1960s building so despite the substantial addition in the photo on the right the removal was seen as a net improvement to the building similarly in San Francisco we also have the example of this california electrical light building 24 instance in 2012 you had a construction of a 5 story rear edition with a 40 foot building from townsend street and a new construction within the footprint and as you can see a deep recess and differe