Mewy 1986 online dating
there is no significant tie between the institute and the lgbtq movementism while the institute provided courses in human sexuality it did not like unlike other buildings in san francisco recognized in the lgbtq context statement beprovide a meeting place for gay activists, house leaders in the move 789 or serve as a community center.
the fact 1523 franklin housed the institute for human sexuality which it didn't have any significant association with the lgbtq movement doesn't warrant a historic resource.
i know we were thinking of ways in which we can maybe help further support nominations that come forward. election of officers in accordance with rules and regulations of san francisco historic preservation commissionism the president and vice president shall be elected at the first meeting held after the first day of january each year or a subsequent meeting the date of which is fixed by good afternoon commissioners. i will present a ordinance proposing to amend the planning code to exempt lands mark building from conditional use and replacement requirements under proposition x converting or demolish disboougz and repair or pdr space, arts activity space squz institutional spaces.
proposition x as you may recall was passed november 20s 16 requires projects within zoning districts in eastern neighborhood plan areas to secure conditional use authorization when proposing to demolish ic spacess.
this is under ceqa case law and our final decision pending any new information that the building is a historic resource and if a focused eir is required due to scope of the project you will see that during the review and comment period as is standard the only report i have at the last hearing i put forward nominations for land mark trees. month but great if key we can schedule it for the first-feb.
it turns out there is a error in the nomination form and those require a resolution so looking into that with staff and contacting property owners so that will come back before the full commission. on that the motion to adopt the minutes for december 7, 2016. only the agenda to do general overview and review of the legacy business.
operating a building like this is a very expensive undertaking rks costs million a year just to own it. it is also very expensive than a non historic building to upgrade.
to this date the building has no heating, no wheelchair accessible entrance, no sprinkler system or elevator or exists, we need someone to build three shafts from the roof to the basement horrifically expensive so people get in and outlet safely in the events of a fire.
we had representatives from all the historic lgbtq on claves within san francisco and it was a great discussion to help move the project forward and increase visibility of the working group but also participation to make sure all voices are considered and heard as we prepare recommendations for how to implement a strategy in the future t.the first is limit the tot lt area converted from any project while allowing a adequate converted space and the second is constrain the number of buildings that may avail of this exempttion.i like to show you a map if i can get the overhead. these three buildings in yellow are the 3 buildings with landmark status as of july 1, 2016. we do expect commissioner johnck to arrive shortly and commissioner johns to be absent today. at this time members may address the commission on items of interest within the stubjection matter jurisdiction accept for agenda items. as a initial matter the finding the property is a historic resource for the purposes of ceqa review would require a eir in plans for demolition. we disagrewed with the finding and encourage the commission to firth recall consider the matter and place it on thujnda for a future meeting.