Historic Preservation Commission - March 16, 2016 - Minutes

Meeting Date: 
March 16, 2016 - 11:30am
Location: 

SAN FRANCISCO
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION

 

Meeting Minutes

 

Commission Chambers Room 400,
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102-4689

Wednesday, March 16, 2016
11:30 a.m.
Architectural Review Committe
Meeting

 

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:   Pearlman, Hyland, Hasz

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY COMMISSIONER PEARLMAN AT 11:32 PM

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE:   Pilar LaValley, Tim Frye - Preservation Officer, Jonas P. Ionin – Commission Secretary

SPEAKER KEY:
+ indicates a speaker in support of an item;

  • indicates a speaker in opposition to an item; and

= indicates a neutral speaker or a speaker who did not indicate support or opposition.

Hearing Materials are available at:
Website: http://www.sfplanning.org
Planning Department, 1650 Mission Street, 4th Floor, Suite 400
Planning Information Center, 1660 Mission Street, 1st Floor
Voice recorded Agenda, only: (415) 558-6320

Commission Hearing Broadcasts:
Live stream: http://www.sfgovtv.org

Ordinances and Accessibility
Hearing Procedures

 

1. 2015-014090PTA                                                (P. LAVALLEY: (415) 575-9084)
1 STOCKTON STREET – northwest corner of Stockton and Ellis Streets; Assessor's Block 0327, Lots 025. Request for Review and Comment before the Architectural Review Committee for the proposed exterior alterations, including installation of new cladding materials and fenestration. Constructed in 1973, with substantial alterations to the façade in the early 2000s, the subject building is a Category V (Unrated) Building within the Kearny-Market-Mason Conservation District, the C-3-R (Downtown Retail) Zoning District, and 80-130-F Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Review and Comment

SPEAKERS:          = Pilar LaValley – Staff presentation
                          + (F) Speaker – Project presentation
                          +(M) Speaker – Materials             
ACTION:             Reviewed and Commented

1. Composition and Massing: The Commissioners generally concurred with staff that the alternate design, with continuous vertical piers, was more compatible with the character of the District, with all three Commissioners noting that the vertical elements were important to the design.
Commissioner Hasz stated that there were too many horizontal elements when the dimensional terra cotta, textured terra cotta, window shapes, and overall building form were all considered.
Commissioners Pearlman and Hyland concurred with staff that the verticals were important elements of the design but also noted that strong horizontal elements to break up the massing are necessary. Commissioner Pearlman commented that the proportions of the design were problematic with the building feeling too top heavy. Commissioner Pearlman suggested several design approaches that should be explored to address the proportions of the façade, such as raising the sill at the second floor windows, raising the height of the second floor glazing, increasing the size of cornice, and/or placing the cornice lower on the façade with a parapet above. Commissioner Pearlman also suggested that the vertical piers should be proud of the second floor window sill and noted that there may be an approach that emphasizes the vertical piers on the Stockton façade while deemphasizing them on the Ellis façade.

2. Material and Color: The Commissioners concurred with staff that proposed materials and color palette was compatible with the District. Commissioner Hasz, however, stated that he had some concerns about the proposed textured terra cotta, noting that it added another horizontal element and that its apparent porosity might make graffiti removal difficult. Commissioner Pearlman responded that he was comfortable with the textured terra cotta as it would blend in with the matching smooth terra cotta.

3. Detailing and Ornamentation: The Commissioners concurred with staff that the simple and contemporary design of the façade appears compatible with the District.

4. Signs: Commissioner Hasz stated that there should only be one sign per façade for the retail tenant. Several Commissioners were concerned about the proposed T‐Mobile sign adjacent/above the MTA entry as they felt that it did not relate to the MTA entry or the retail space entry.
LETTER:               0058

ADJOURNMENT – 11:57 AM
ADOPTED APRIL 6, 2016