Robert Fruchtman

District 8, man

Hello San Francisco. I'm attending a virtual meeting about Supervisor Mandelman's proposal for a historic landmark district around the Castro commerical corridor. I just listened to the Planning Department's presentation from yesterday. Stephen Torres from the Castro LGBTQ cultural district is here.

Smith says the survey looks at identifying historic resource, and the landmark process highlights a subset of them that are representative of San Francisco, going through a separate review process.

Alex Westhoff says that the Q&A is out of time. He says he's available to answer further questions and thanks everyone for attending. That's it from me. Thanks for reading.

Smith says Planning is grateful for the support of the LGBTQ Castro Cultural District and "has been working very closely with them." Smith says Planning is trying to empower communities and keep culture in San Francisco.

Smith responds to a question about if there's scrutiny over historic properties with regards to environmental review. She says Planning isn't looking at every building and looking for X, Y, Z, and says every building needs to go through Certificate of Appropriateness process.

LaValley answers a question about the method of determining historic significances and says there's a process of talking to the community and property owners to see if they've missed information to add into the overall assessment. New information will be considered as the project progresses forward.

Alex Westhoff shows the QR code again for the survey. Maggie Smith responds to a few more questions/comments around fear of displacement. She says that "we hear you" and that the economic climate is really tough. Planning wants to keep the Castro accessible to everyone, even if people don't think it

Torres wants to say a few words, saying that the historic district is a new construct that allows for new housing. It's important not to look at this issue as a binary, saying that multiple things can exist at the same time.

Torres says the new historic district will not preempt new housing, and that these complaints are a pretext to stop historic designations.

Westhoff answers a question about historic preservation being misused by opponents of housing projects says people can give comment at commission meetings. And there are many examples of new housing projects successfully approved on historic properties, recognizing cities are dynamic and changeable.

Westhoff revisits the Walgreens, saying it was the Star Pharmacy, and that two apartments upstairs were queer households, with one being a MacArthur Genius Grant recipient.

Pilar LaValley reads another question: Are there alternative methods of recognizing significance, and are there methods that do not restrict changes to the properties? She says Article 10 landmarking is narrow in its regulatory application, and many property types fall under its umbrella.

LaValley says indivudal properties and landmark districts have features that are regulated in terms of how they change. There's not a good alternative to recognizing significance and allowing maximum amount of alteration.

Smith also says it's "not at all the case" that this proposal would limit housing, because the zoning would stay the same. With the Family Zoning Plan, that rezoning removed some landmark districts. (Not sure what she's referring to?)

Smith also says Planning is not trying to freeze the neighborhood in amber and is trying to keep people in place. Historic preservation efforts do not want to push anyone out. It's a tool to keep people in place. Housing development can still happen on these properties.

Pilar LaValley says she has a few other questions. She asks if any properties will be required to have below market rate units as part of the landmark district?

Maggie Smith with SF Planning is responding to the Mills Act question, would application occur at the same time as the landmarking? She says that it would be a separate process.

Westhoff says that because of that, the Walgreens has a strong association with LGBTQ history.

Pilar Valley responds to another question about the shape of the district, e.g. why isn't the neighborhood bigger, why is there a disconnected square? Westhoff says that the district's history as a streetcar suburb includes some, and it's important for the district to be concentrated.

Westhoff also says that legacy businesses can be keeper of intangible cultural heritage. That's a program that's worth exploring.

Q5 is how the Walgreens on the corner is a contributor to the culutral district when it has a minimal association with LGBTQ+ history. How is the department assessing the level of significance? Westhoff says that he'd have to check, but thinks that's where the first cases of AIDS were documented.

Alex says there's an optional questionnaire and he wants to allow time for attendees to answer them. He says the survey is anonymous but people can provide their contact information.

Q4 is how will the department assess the cultural integrity of properties in addition to architecture. Westhoff says that Planning is working on a cultural integrity methodology, along with historic preservation staff, and he doesn't want to speak on their behalf. He also mentions the SF Survey.

LaValley says Q2 is a question about how the examples of adding housing to landmarks mistakes the scale of sites in the Castro. Alex Westhoff answers that there are many examples throughout the city.

Q3 is a question about what the Mills Act is. Westhoff (from Planning) says he's happy to set up a 1-on-1 conversation on that because Maggie Smith from SF Planning is having trouble being heard.

Pilar LaValley is answering a question from the audience about how the dept's fact sheet says that historic designation doesn't prevent housing, but the district would opt properties out of bonus heights, so which is true? She seems tongue-tied.

LaValley says that historic designation is another layer over the zoning code but it changes use district or height district in terms of "how each property shows up."

Torres cites the ability to "retain" businesses and tenants. He says LGBT people are targeted for erasure in the US and in San Francisco. So it's important to remember "these spaces and what happened here". The loss of thousands of lives to AIDS/COVID has reshaped history.

Torres concludes by saying that the culutral district is supportive of the designation.