Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Historic Building Maintenance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission concurs with staff that HBMP for 665 Third Street will help preserve contributing landmark

San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission · October 2, 2013
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission agreed with planning staff that the proposed PDR‑to‑office conversion at 665 Third Street qualifies for Planning Code §803.9(a) and that the sponsor’s historic building maintenance plan would enhance the feasibility of preserving the contributing building; the commission voted to concur unanimously.

At Wednesday’s meeting the Historic Preservation Commission concurred with department staff that a project at 665 Third Street seeking conversion of up to 123,700 square feet from production/distribution/repair (PDR) to office use qualifies under Planning Code §803.9(a) and will enhance the feasibility of preserving the contributing building when paired with a historic building maintenance plan (HBMP).

Staff told commissioners that the HBMP submitted by the project sponsor includes specific commitments—window inspection and repair, historic paint analysis, restoration of ground‑floor windows and signage, and an interpretive display—that together reinforce the building’s preservation. Staff also said the project complies with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation.

Caroline Guibert, representing the project sponsor, said the sponsor had incorporated all staff recommendations into the HBMP and respectfully requested the commission concur with staff’s determination. Commissioners asked procedural questions about the 25,000‑square‑foot threshold—below which the zoning administrator handles the change of use and above which the planning commission must review the conditional use authorization—and staff explained how §803.9(a) functions as an incentive to preserve landmark properties.

The commission voted unanimously to concur with staff that the project’s HBMP would enhance preservation feasibility. The vote was 6–0.