Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Peace Pagoda Plaza topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission continues Peace Pagoda and Peace Plaza landmark item after community concerns, to Sept. 20
Summary
The commission continued consideration of landmark designation for Peace Pagoda and Peace Plaza to Sept. 20 after mixed public comments about the plaza’s degraded integrity and concerns raised by Supervisor Breed’s office; staff will engage the community and report back.
Get email alerts on the Peace Pagoda Plaza topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Historic Preservation Commission on Aug. 16 voted to continue consideration of landmark designation for the Peace Pagoda and Peace Plaza in Japantown to Sept. 20 to allow outreach to Supervisor London Breed’s office and further community engagement.
Planning staff recommended designation of both the pagoda and the plaza, noting the pagoda’s design by Japanese architect Yoshiro Taniguchi and the plaza’s historical role as a community gathering place. "The Peace Pagoda and Peace Plaza are significant for their associations with Japanese master architect Yoshiro Taniguchi and the history of Japantown," staff said.
Public testimony showed division: George Yamasaki Jr. supported designation of the pagoda but opposed designating the plaza because he argued the 2000–2001 redesign had degraded the plaza’s integrity. "The integrity of Peace Plaza has been greatly degraded," he said, adding that the plaza may not meet integrity criteria. Other task-force members and community speakers, including Alice Kawahatsu and Rosalind Tohono, supported designation of both plaza and pagoda and urged general, rather than hyper-specific, character-defining language to preserve flexibility for future work.
Commissioners discussed the risk that forwarding a nomination without sufficient community consensus could stall at the Board of Supervisors, and whether designation should be strictly limited to the pagoda or also include the plaza's setting in broad terms. To allow time for Supervisor Breed’s office to state concerns and for additional outreach, the commission voted to continue the item to Sept. 20 and directed President Wolfram to reach out to the supervisor’s office in the interim.
The continuance vote passed 5 to 0.
