10

SEC. 10. ADDITIONS. Additions to existing buildings and new infill construction proposed within the South End Historic District must reflect an understanding of the relationship of the proposal with the contributing buildings within the district. Additions shall be reviewed for compatibility with the historic building and the district while infill construction shall be reviewed for compatibility with the overall district. Neither should directly imitate nor replicate existing features. For additions, every effort should be made to minimize the visibility of the new structure within the district. Infill construction should reflect the character of the district, including the prevailing heights of contributing buildings without creating a false sense of history. Property owners should consult early in the process with a Planning Department Historic Preservation Technical Specialist when developing a proposal. Additions will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and any proposed addition should be located in an inconspicuous location and not result in a radical change to the form or character of the historic building. A vertical addition may be approved, depending on how the addition impacts the building and its relative visibility from the surrounding public rights-of-way within the district. The Planning Department evaluates all proposals for properties identified under Article 10 of the Planning Code for compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards (36 C.F.R. § 67.7 (2001)). Based on these Standards, Department staff uses the following criteria when reviewing proposals for vertical additions: • The structure respects the general size, shape, and scale of the features associated with the property and the district and the structure is connected to the property in a manner that does not alter, change, obscure, damage, or destroy any of the character-defining features of the property and the district. • The design respects the general historic and architectural characteristics associated with the property and the district without replicating historic styles or elements that will result in creating a false sense of history. • The materials are compatible with the property or district in general character, color and texture. As part of the Planning Department review process, the project sponsor shall conduct and submit an analysis that illustrates the relative visibility of a proposed vertical addition from within the district. As part of this analysis, sightline cross-sections and perspective drawings illustrating the proportionality and scale, as well as the visible extent of the addition from prescribed locations should be submitted. When a district provides an opportunity for new construction through existing vacant parcels or by replacing non-contributing buildings, a sensitive design is of critical importance. Historic buildings within the district should be utilized and referenced for design context. Contemporary design that respects the District's existing character-defining features without replicating historic designs is encouraged. The Department uses the following criteria when reviewing proposals for infill construction: • The structure respects the general size, shape, and scale of the character-defining features associated with the district and its relationship to the character-defining features of the immediate neighbors and the district. • The site plan respects the general site characteristics associated with the district. • The design respects the general character-defining features associated with the district • The materials are compatible with the district in general character, color, and texture. (Added by Ord. 298-08, File No. 081153, App. 12/19/2008)

APPENDIX J TO ARTICLE 10 - CIVIC CENTER HISTORIC DISTRICT SEC. 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. The Board of Supervisors hereby finds that the area known and described in this ordinance as the Civic Center Historic District contains a number of structures having a special character and special historical, architectural and aesthetic interest and value, and constitutes a distinct section of the City. The Board of Supervisors further finds that designation of said area as an Historic District will be in furtherance of and in conformance with the purposes of Article 10 of the City Planning Code and the standards set forth therein, and that preservation on an area basis rather than on the basis of individual structures alone is in order. This ordinance is intended to further the general purpose of historic preservation legislation as set forth in Section 1001 of the City Planning Code, to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the public. (Added by Ord. 413-94, App. 12/23/94) SEC. 2. DESIGNATION. Pursuant to Section 1004 of the City Planning Code, Chapter II, Part II of the San Francisco Municipal Code, the San Francisco Civic Center Historic District is hereby designated as an Historic District, this designation having been duly approved by Resolution No. 13719 of the City Planning Commission and Resolution No. 454 of the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board. (Added by Ord. 413-94, App. 12/23/94) SEC. 3. LOCATION AND BOUNDARIES. The location and boundaries of the San Francisco Civic Center Historic District generally bounded by Golden Gate Avenue to the north, Franklin Street to the west, Jones Street to the east and Market Street to the south shall be as designated on the San Francisco Civic Center Historic District Map, the original of which is on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors under File No. 115-94-10, which Map is hereby incorporated herein as though fully set forth. (Added by Ord. 413-94, App. 12/23/94) SEC. 4. RELATION TO CITY PLANNING CODE AND THE PROVISIONS OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO. (a) Article 10 of the City Planning Code is the basic law governing historic preservation in the City and County of San Francisco. This ordinance, being a specific application of Article 10, is both subject to and in addition to the provisions thereof. (b) Except as may be specifically provided to the contrary in this ordinance, nothing in this ordinance shall supersede, impair or modify any City Planning Code provisions applicable to property in the San Francisco Civic Center Historic District, including but not limited to existing and future regulations controlling uses, height, bulk, lot coverage, floor area ratio, required open space, off-street parking and signs. (Added by Ord. 413-94, App. 12/23/94) SEC. 5. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE. The San Francisco Civic Center possesses a unique place and significance in the areas of architecture, history, and environment worthy of protection as an historic district. The land on which the Civic Center stands was declared a City Hall Reservation as early as 1870. Portions of that reservation land were sold to raise funds for City Hall construction, and Old City Hall - located on the site that had first been used as the Yerba Buena Cemetery, approximately where the present library stands - was erected between 1871 and 1897, in a lengthy project marked by the now well known City government corruption of that time. In 1899, B.J.S. Cahill, with the encouragement of Mayor Phelan, proposed a grander vision for the area, with the dual goal of clearing up land titles clouded by the dubious practices of the promoters of the Old City Hall and, at the same time, of creating an imposing setting for the entire area. This plan envisioned clearing out smaller structures and visually uniting the remaining monumental structures - Old City Hall, the Main Post Office, the Hibernia Bank building, and other larger structures - and setting them off against new open spaces (such as a planned extension of the Golden Gate Park panhandle to Market Street). Conflicting new developments were blocked for a time, but the plan eventually failed, in large part because of general distrust - bred of experience, perhaps - of large government projects. Undaunted, former Mayor Phelan soon led the formation of an Association for the Improvement and Adornment of San Francisco. In 1904, the Association invited Daniel Burnham to design a grand plan for the City, with B.J.S. Cahill providing a design for the Civic Center. This produced two visions of the Civic Center: Cahill, with the practicality borne of personal and local experience, proposed using existing structures and City-owned land to create a central plaza, surrounded by major buildings, and, again, connected to a Golden Gate Park panhandle extension; Burnham proposed a grander Civic Center, with buildings connected by a generally circular series of boulevards and grand open vistas. The Burnham Plan, though politically impractical, fired the public imagination and was submitted to and adopted by the Board of Supervisors on September 27, 1905.