I'm listening to the Telegraph Hill Dwellers ask the California State Historical Resources Commission to landmark an old sausage factory. https://socketsite.com/archives/2018/11/plans-to-save-the-facade-of-iconic-north-beach-sausage-factory.html

THD President Stan Hayes: The property owner wants to develop housing at this site using the State Density Bonus. "We don't oppose that housing as long as it's affordable and respects the scale of its historic setting."

Also representing THD is Katherine Petrin, preparer of the nomination. The factory was built in a "teeming and still-dense" mixed use area. Wonderful aromas wafted into the neighborhood until the 1970s and it was integrated into the social fabric. It's a distinct landmark.

Petrin: It's a "neighborhood and city treasure." The findings are not surprising. The building contributes to the Upper Grant Avenue Historical District as of 1982. The property owner was required to submit a historical resource evaluation and it was found to be eligible.

Petrin: The building also qualifies as historic for CEQA, and the property owner even commented that it's a handsome building.

Property owner Kieran Buckley is now speaking, strong Irish accent.

Buckley: "I intend to keep [the building]" and provide affordable and market-rate housing using the current undeveloped parking space on the lot. THD did not alert me to the nomination or ask my opinion.

Buckley: When the building was deemed a resource in SF, I only learned about the application a day before its hearing. My building application is sensitive to the factory's historic aspects. This application has "all the hallmarks of a political play to stop this development."

Buckley has requested that his architect, Amelie Crowe, be allotted some of his time.

Crowe: I'm a member of the architectural team for the site application. Commenting to provide context. The nomination was not made with the owner's consent or knowledge.

Crowe: Plans were submitted for this site over two years ago. Plans are for 2/3-bedroom homes for families. The project was well-received in a neighborhood meeting. We enjoy the existing building. The design approaches integration conservatively.

Crowe: The existing building has been vacant for decades and has fallen into disrepair. Our project will restore the building. We have concerns that this nomination, years into the permit process, is being used strategically to prevent development on this site.

Crowe: One way a building permit can be denied is it if would have an unmitigatable impact on a historic resource. This nomination would allow the project design to be second-guessed.

Crowe reading a statement from a local San Francisco historian that the commission should consider the practical effects.

Stan Hayes will receive a 5-minute rebuttal.

Hayes: I just want to clear up something Mr. Buckley said. "We're sorry Mr. Buckley feels as though he's not been notified." the Office of Historic Preservation sent him letters about it.

Kieran Buckley gets a chance to respond.

Buckley: I did receive letters, but I never heard from you or anybody before it went before the City of San Francisco.

Petrin gets more time to rebut.

Petrin: I want to reiterate that the nomination makes the case for being eligible for the National Register. That's the focus. "I hesitate to weigh in on the project since that's not the focus of the hearing, but perhaps as a neighbor"—

Petrin: The community would very much welcome a project that meets the standards of the Secretary of the Interior and makes Buon Gusto a vibrant part of the neighborhood. Building has not been used in a significant way since 1992. "This is not an attempt to stop a project."

I just spoke against the nomination because it includes a parking lot. I was definitely a bit scattered. Now @muchasita is speaking, agreeing on the parking lot issue. She also adds that the nomination could be used to challenge city planners' review.

@RamonDarioIT also gives comment in opposition to the nomination because San Francisco should be building housing for people, not preserving parking lots.

@samdman95: This application is not timely. And the THD is doing this nomination to prevent housing construction. They opposed an affordable housing development at 88 Broadway. If we let the THD abuse this process, the CA legislature will make it harder to landmark future sites

Commisioner Luis Hoyos: I believe the nomination is well-written and covers the criteria adequately. We are prevented from taking economic development into account. "We're not blind to what's going on." We're asked to just give an opinion on the narrow issue of significance.

Hoyos: Additions to historic buildings are allowed. Additions following the standards can easily accommodate multi-family housing. We don't have a huge disagreement here. The two sides have an adversarial relationship, but that's not our purview. We only vote on the merits.

Commissioner René Vellanoweth: As a historian, I teach my students that when we try to preserve the built environment, it sometimes gets in the way of what other people want to do. I feel and I hear what people think about this.

Vellanoweth: "Fortunately, we're able to extract this body from the political realities of life."

Vellanoweth: We recognize the historical significance of things. We're not saying things can't be built around this building.

Bryan Brandes is asking staff if the parking lot has to be included in the nomination.

Adam Sriro: The nomination does not identify the parking lot as contributing to the resource, but it's part of the parcel.

Jay Correia, staff, notes that the Department of the Interior dislikes applications which only include a building on a parcel, and that the parking lot was used for truck traffic.

Hoyos: It sounds like the parking lot was part of the commercial purpose of the building. You can use the parking lot for housing and then add more parking. The project can still go forward after the nomination. "I don't see anything wrong happening here."

Commissioner Hoyos makes a motion to add Buon Gusto to the National Register of Historic Places, under criteria A, C, and G.

It's seconded by Commissioner Lee Adams III.

It passes 7-0-0. That's it for me in this lesson on how the sausage is made. Thanks for reading.