San Francisco Planning Code § 1125 Severability

If any part of this Article 11 is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Article 11 or any part thereof. The Board of Supervisors hereby declares that it would have passed all portions of this Article and any amendments thereto irrespective of the fact that any one or more portions be declared unconstitutional or invalid.

(Formerly codified as Sec. 1124; redesignated and amended by Ord. 95-12, File No. 120301, App. 5/21/2012, Eff. 6/20/2012)

AMENDMENT HISTORY

Former Sec. 1124 redesignated as current Sec. 1125; section amended; Ord. 95-12, Eff. 6/20/2012.

APPENDIX A TO ARTICLE 11

CATEGORY I BUILDINGS

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 142-87, App. 5/1/87; Ord. 47-96, App. 2/2/96; Ord. 182-12 , File No. 120665, App. 8/8/2012, Eff. 9/7/2012; Ord. 257-18, File No. 180724, App. 11/2/2018, Eff. 12/3/2018; Ord. 258-18, File No. 180725, App. 11/2/2018, Eff. 12/3/2018)

Category V Buildings in that portion of the Kearny-Market-Mason-Sutter Conservation District which is in the C-3-0 Use District as shown on Sectional Map 1 of the Zoning Map are eligible for the transfer of TDR as provided in Section 1109(c).

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

APPENDIX F TO ARTICLE 11

NEW MONTGOMERY-MISSION-SECOND STREET CONSERVATION DISTRICT

SEC. 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

It is hereby found that the area known and described in this appendix as the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Street area is a subarea within the C-3 District, that possesses concentrations of buildings that together create a subarea of architectural and environmental quality and importance which contributes to the beauty and attractiveness of the City. It is further found that the area meets the standards for designation of a Conservation District as set forth in Section 1103 of Article 11 and that the designation of said area as a Conservation District will be in furtherance of and in conformance with the purposes of Article 11 of the City Planning Code.

This designation is intended to promote the health, safety, prosperity and welfare of the people of the City through the effectuation of the purposes set forth in Section 1101 of Article 11 and the maintenance of the scale and character of the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Street area by:

(a) The protection and preservation of the basic characteristics and salient architectural details of structures insofar as these characteristics and details are compatible with the Conservation District;

(b) Providing scope for the continuing vitality of the District through private renewal and architectural creativity within appropriate controls and standards;

(c) Preservation of the scale and character of the District separate from the prevailing larger scale of the financial district and permitted scale in the new Special Development District.

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 182-12 , File No. 120665, App. 8/8/2012, Eff. 9/7/2012)

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION.

Pursuant to Section 1103.1 of Article 11 of the City Planning Code (Part II, Chapter XI of the San Francisco Municipal Code), the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Street area is hereby designated as a Conservation District. (Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 182-12 , File No. 120665, App. 8/8/2012, Eff. 9/7/2012)

SEC. 3. LOCATION AND BOUNDARIES.

The location and boundaries of the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Street Conservation District shall be as designated on the New Montgomery-Second Street Conservation District Map, the original of which is on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors under File 223-84-4, which Map is hereby incorporated herein as though fully set forth, and a facsimile of which is reproduced hereinbelow.

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 182-12 , File No. 120665, App. 8/8/2012, Eff. 9/7/2012)

SEC. 4. RELATION TO CITY PLANNING CODE.

(a) Article 11 of the City Planning Code is the basic law governing preservation of buildings and districts of architectural importance in the C-3 District of the City and County of San Francisco. This Appendix is subject to and in addition to the provisions thereof.

(b) Except as may be specifically provided to the contrary, nothing in this Appendix shall supersede, impair or modify any City Planning Code provisions applicable to property in the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Street Conservation District including, but not limited to, regulations controlling uses, height, bulk, coverage, floor area ratio, required open space, off-street parking and signs.

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 182-12 , File No. 120665, App. 8/8/2012, Eff. 9/7/2012)

SEC. 5. JUSTIFICATION.

The characteristics of the Conservation District justifying its designation are as follows:

(a) History of the District. The core of the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Street Conservation District is a product of the post-1906 reconstruction of downtown San Francisco. Rebuilt between 1906 and 1933 this district represents a collection of masonry commercial loft buildings that exhibit a high level of historic architectural integrity and create a cohesive district of two-to-eight story masonry buildings of similar scale, massing, setback, materials, fenestration pattern, style, and architectural detailing.

This corridor forms one of the earliest attempts to extend the uses of the financial and retail districts to the South of Market area. Since Montgomery Street was the most important commercial street in the 1870's, New Montgomery Street was planned as a southern extension from Market Street to the Bay. Opposition from landowners south of Howard Street, however, prevented the street from reaching its original bayside destination. William Ralston, who was instrumental in the development of the new street, built the Grand Hotel and later the Palace Hotel at its Market Street intersection. A wall of large hotels on Market Street actually hindered the growth of New Montgomery Street and few retail stores and offices ventured south of Market Street. The unusually wide width of Market Street acted as a barrier between areas to the north and south for many years.

A small number of office buildings were built on New Montgomery Street as far south as Atom Alley (now Natoma Street) after the fire. Many buildings were completed in 1907, and most of the street assumed its present character by 1914. At 74 New Montgomery Street, the Call newspaper established its first headquarters. A noteworthy addition to the streetscape was the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Building. At the time of its completion in 1925, it was the largest building on the West Coast devoted to the exclusive use of one firm. Until the 1960's, the office district on New Montgomery Street was the furthest extension of the financial district into the South of Market area. More characteristic were warehouses and businesses which supported the nearby office district. For example, the Furniture Exchange at the northwest corner of New Montgomery and Howard Streets, completed in 1920, was oriented to other wholesale and showroom uses along Howard Street.

One block to the east, Second Street had a different history from New Montgomery Street. The future of Second Street as an extension of the downtown depended upon the southward extension of the street through the hill south of Howard Street. At one time there was even a proposal to extend Second Street north in order to connect with Montgomery Street. The decision to extend Montgomery Street south rather than Second Street north due to the high cost of the Second Street Cut, however, discouraged retail and office growth on the street. As a result, by the 1880's Second Street was established as a wholesaling rather than retail or office area. In the 1920's, Second Street contained a wide mixture of office support services. These included printers, binderies, a saddlery, a wholesale pharmaceutical outlet, and a variety of other retail stores and smaller offices. Industrial uses were commonly located on the alleyways such as Minna and Natoma and on Second Street, south of Howard Street.

Howard Street between 1st and 3rd Street became a popular and convenient extension for retail and wholesale dealers after 1906. As with Mission Street, the area still contains a number of smaller commercial loft structures that represent some of the best examples within the district, such as the Volker Building at 625 Howard Street, the Crellin Building at 583 Howard Street, and the Sharon Estate Building at 667 Howard Street.

The transformation of much of the area within the boundaries of the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Street Conservation District into a southerly extension of downtown was reflected in the large number of multi-story structures built along both Mission and Market streets. The intersection of 3rd and Mission evolved into the most important

intersections in the survey area, bracketed on three corners by important early skyscrapers, including the rebuilt Aronson Building on the northwest corner, the Williams Buildings on the southeast corner, and the Gunst Building (demolished) on the southwest corner.

(b) Basic Nature of the District. New Montgomery Street is characterized by large buildings that often occupy an entire section of a block defined by streets and alleys or a major portion of these subblocks. The buildings are of a variety of heights, but the heights of most of the buildings range from five to eight stories. Second Street is characterized by smaller, less architecturally significant buildings, but, because of their continuous streetwall, they form a more coherent streetscape. Without some sort of protection for the less significant buildings, the quality of the district would be lost due to pressure from the expanding office core.

(c) Architectural Character. Most of the contributing buildings are designed in the American Commercial Style and feature facades divided into a tripartite arrangement consisting of a base, shaft, and capital. Although the scale and size of the structures on New Montgomery Street are somewhat monumental, the area remains attractive for pedestrians. There are a number of outstanding buildings concentrated on New Montgomery, such as the Palace Hotel, the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Building tower, and the Sharon Building. Ornamentation of district contributors is most often RenaissanceBaroque with later examples of Spanish, Colonial, Gothic Revival Styles, and Art Deco. Examples of the styles range from the Gothic skyscraper massing and Art Deco detailing of the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Building to the Renaissance Palazzo style of the Palace Hotel. The primary building materials are earthtone bricks, stone or terra cotta, with ornamental details executed in a variety of materials including terra cotta, metal, stucco and stone.

With the exceptions of corner buildings, Second Street, Mission and Howard Streets have a smaller, more intimate scale. While on New Montgomery Street, buildings typically occupy an entire subblock, on Second Street, three or four small buildings will occupy the same area. The buildings are generally mixed-use office and retail structures, two-to-seven stories in height, with Renaissance-influenced ornament.

The two streets are unified by several elements, including an architectural vocabulary which draws from similar historical sources, similar materials, scale, fenestration, color, stylistic origins, texture, and ornament.

(d) Uniqueness and Location. The District is located close to the central core of the financial district and is adjacent to an area projected for the future expansion. It is one of the few architecturally significant areas remaining largely intact in the South of Market area.

(e) Visual and Functional Unity. The District has a varied character ranging from the small and intimate on the alley streets to a more monumental scale on New Montgomery. In spite of this wide range, the district forms a coherent entity due to the buildings' common architectural vocabulary and the rhythm of building masses created by the District's intersecting alleys.

(f) Dynamic Continuity. The District is an active part of the downtown area, and after some years of neglect is undergoing reinvestment, which is visible in the rehabilitation of the Pacific Telephone Building, and the repair and rehabilitation of other buildings in the District.

(g) Benefits to the City and Its Residents. The District is a microcosm of twentieth century commercial architecture, ranging from low-level speculative office blocks to the City's premier hotels and executive offices of the time. The District now houses a variety of uses from inexpensive restaurants and support commercial uses, such as printers, to executive offices. The area retains a comfortable human scale, which will become increasingly important as neighboring areas of the South of Market become more densely developed.

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 182-12 , File No. 120665, App. 8/8/2012, Eff. 9/7/2012)

SEC. 6. FEATURES.

The exterior architectural features of the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Street District are as follows:

(a) Massing and Composition. Almost without exception, the buildings in the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Conservation District are built to the front property line and occupy the entire site. Most buildings are either square or rectangular in plan, some with interior light courts to allow sunlight and air into the interiors of buildings. Nearly all cover their entire parcels, and their primary facades face the street. Building massings along New Montgomery and Second Streets have different directional orientations. For the most part, the large buildings on New Montgomery Street are horizontally oriented, since they are built on relatively large lots, often occupying an entire blockface. Their horizontal width often exceeds their height. The buildings on Second Street are built on much smaller lots, and hence have a vertical orientation. An exception on New Montgomery is the tower of the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Building, whose soaring verticality is unique for that street.

To express the mass and weight of the structure, masonry materials are used on multi-dimensional wall surfaces with texture and depth, which simulates the qualities necessary to support the weight of a load-bearing wall.

Despite their differing orientation, almost all buildings share a two or three-part compositional arrangement. In addition, buildings are often divided into bays which establish a steady rhythm along the streets of the District. The rhythm is the result of fenestration, structural articulation or other detailing which breaks the facade into discrete segments. A common compositional device in the District is the emphasis placed upon either the end bays or the central bay.

(b) Scale. More than two-thirds of the contributing buildings are three-to-eight story brick or concrete commercial loft buildings constructed during the five years after the 1906 Earthquake and Fire. The scale of the District varies from the small buildings on Howard, Mission, Natoma, and Second Streets, such as the Phoenix Desk Company Building at 666 Mission Street, the Burdette Building at 90 Second Street, and the Emerison Flag Company Building at 161 Natoma Street; to medium-scaled structures on Mission and New Montgomery Streets, such as the Veronica Building at 647 Mission Street, and the Standard Building at 111 New Montgomery Street; to large-scale buildings on New Montgomery Street, such as the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Building at 140 New Montgomery. On New Montgomery Street, the large facades are not commonly divided into smaller bays, establishing a medium scale when combined with the five- to eight-story height of the buildings. Similarly, the use of elaborate ornament on many of the buildings breaks their large facades into smaller sections and accordingly reduces their scale. Second Street is characterized by much smaller buildings with more frequent use of vertical piers whose scale is very intimate for the South of Market area.

(c) Materials and Color. Various forms of masonry are the predominant building materials in the district. A number of buildings on the northern end of New Montgomery use brown or buff brick. Terra cotta is also used as a facing material, and is frequently glazed to resemble granite or other stones. On Second and Mission Streets, several buildings are faced in stucco. To express the mass and weight of the structure, masonry materials are often rusticated at the ground and second story to increase the textural variation and sense of depth. Several buildings along Howard Street are noteworthy because they are clad in brick in warm earth tones, exhibit fine masonry craftsmanship, and remain unpainted.

The materials are generally colored light or medium earth tones, including white, cream, buff, yellow, and brown. Individual buildings generally use a few different tones of one color.

(d) Detailing and Ornamentations. Buildings range from industrial brick and stucco office/warehouses to ornately decorated office buildings. The details on the latter buildings are generally of Classical/Renaissance derivation and include projecting cornices and belt courses, rustication, columns and colonnades, and arches. Industrial commercial buildings are noted by their utilitarian nature, with limited areas or ornament applied at the cornice entablature and around windows. (Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 182-12 , File No. 120665, App. 8/8/2012, Eff. 9/7/2012)

SEC. 7. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW OF NEW CONSTRUCTION AND CERTAIN ALTERATIONS.

(a) Standards. All construction of new buildings and all major alterations, which are subject to the provisions of Sections 1110, 1111 through 1111.6 and 1113, shall be compatible with the District in general with respect to the building's composition and massing, scale, materials and colors, and detailing and ornamentation, including those features described in Section 6 of this Appendix. Emphasis shall be placed on compatibility with those buildings in the area in which the new or altered building is located. In the case of major alterations, only those building characteristics that are affected by the proposed alteration shall be considered in assessing compatibility. Signs on buildings in conservation districts are subject to the provisions of Section 1111.7.

The foregoing standards do not require, or even encourage, new buildings to imitate the styles of the past. Rather, they require the new to be compatible with the old. The determination of compatibility shall be made in accordance with the provisions of Section 309.

(b) Guidelines. The guidelines in this subsection shall be used in assessing compatibility.

(1) Composition and Massing. New construction should maintain the character of surrounding buildings by relating to their prevailing height, mass, proportions, rhythm and composition.

In addition to the consideration of sunlight access for the street, an appropriate streetwall height is established by reference to the prevailing height of the buildings on the block and especially that of adjacent buildings. The prevailing height of buildings on New Montgomery Street is between five and eight stories while buildings on Second Street commonly range from three to six stories. A setback at the streetwall height can permit additional height above the setback up to the height limit without breaking the continuity of the street wall.

Almost all existing buildings are built to the property or street line. This pattern, except in the case of carefully selected open spaces, should not be broken since it could damage the continuity of building rhythms and the definition of streets.

Proportions for new buildings should be established by the prevailing streetwall height and the width of existing buildings. On New Montgomery Street, the historic pattern of large lot development permits new buildings to have a horizontal orientation. In order to ensure that an established set of proportions is maintained on Second Street, new construction should break up facades into discrete elements that relate to prevailing building masses. The use of smaller bays and multiple building entrances are ways in which to relate the proportions of a new building with those of existing buildings.

The design of a new structure should repeat the prevailing pattern of two- and three-part vertical compositions. Onepart buildings without bases do not adequately define the pedestrian streetscape and do not relate well to the prevailing two- and three-part structures.

(2) Scale. The existing scale can be accomplished in a variety of ways, including: a consistent use of size and complexity of detailing with regard to surrounding buildings, continuance of existing bay widths, maintenance of the existing streetwall height, and the use of a base element (of similar height) to maintain the pedestrian environment. Large wall surfaces, which increase a building's scale, should be broken up through the use of vertical piers, detailing and textural variation to reduce the scale of Second Street.

Existing fenestration (windows, entrances) and rhythms which have been established by lot width or bay width should be repeated in new structures. The spacing and size of window openings should follow the sequence set by historic structures. Large glass areas should be broken up by mullions so that the scale of glazed areas is compatible with that of neighboring buildings. Casement and double-hung windows should be used where possible since most existing buildings use these window types.

(3) Materials and Colors. The use of masonry and stone materials or materials that appear similar (such as substituting concrete for stone) can link two disparate structures, or harmonize the appearance of a new structure with the architectural character of a Conservation District. The preferred surface materials for this District are brick, stone, terra cotta and concrete (simulated to look like terra cotta or stone).

The texture of surfaces can be treated in a manner so as to emphasize the bearing function of the material, as is done with rustication on the Rialto Building. Traditional light colors should be used in order to blend in with the character of the district. Dissimilar buildings may be made more compatible by using similar or harmonious colors, and to a lesser extent, by using similar textures.

(4) Detailing and Ornamentation. A new building should relate to the surrounding area by picking up elements from surrounding buildings and repeating them or developing them for new purposes. The new structure should incorporate prevailing cornice lines or belt courses. A variety of Renaissance/Baroque, Gothic and Moderne ornament in the District provides sources for detailing in new buildings in order to strengthen their relationship. Similarly shaped forms can be used as detailing without directly copying historical ornament.

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 182-12 , File No. 120665, App. 8/8/2012, Eff. 9/7/2012)

SEC. 8. TDR; ELIGIBILITY OF CATEGORY V BUILDINGS.

Category V Buildings in that portion of the New Montgomery-Mission-Second Street Conservation District which is in the 150-S Height District as shown on Sectional Map 1H of the Zoning Map are eligible for the transfer of TDR as provided in Section 1109(c).

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85; amended by Ord. 182-12 , File No. 120665, App. 8/8/2012, Eff. 9/7/2012)

Category V Buildings in the Commercial-Leidesdorff District are eligible for the transfer of TDR as provided in Section 1109(c).

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

APPENDIX H TO ARTICLE 11

FRONT-CALIFORNIA CONSERVATION DISTRICT

SEC. 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

It is hereby found that the area known and described in this Appendix as the Front-California Street area is a Subarea within the C-3 District that possesses concentrations of buildings that together create a Subarea of architectural quality and importance which contributes to the beauty and attractiveness of the City. It is further found that the area meets the standards for designation of a Conservation District as set forth in Section 1103 of Article 11 and that the designation of said area as a Conservation District will be in furtherance of and in conformance with the purposes of Article 11 of the City Planning Code.

This Designation is intended to promote the health, safety, prosperity and welfare of the people of the City through the effectuation of the purposes set forth in Section 1101 of Article 11 and the maintenance of the scale and character of the Front-California area by:

(a) The protection and preservation of the basic characteristics and salient architectural details of structures insofar as these characteristics and details are compatible with the Conservation District;

(b) Providing scope for continuing vitality of the District through private renewal and architectural creativity, within appropriate controls and standards. It is intended to foster a climate in which the area continues to provide a variety of retail and commercial uses of significant value to the City.

(c) Encouragement of the continued intensive use of the District by financial district workers during the noon hours. (Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

SEC. 2. DESIGNATION.

Pursuant to Section 1103.1 of Article 11, of the City Planning Code (Part II, Chapter II of the San Francisco Municipal Code), the Front-California area is hereby designated as a Conservation District. (Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

SEC. 3. LOCATION AND BOUNDARIES.

The location and boundaries of the Front-California Conservation District shall be as designated on the Front-California Conservation District Map, the original of which is on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors under File No. 22384-4, which Map is hereby incorporated herein as though fully set forth, and a facsimile of which is reproduced below. (Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

SEC. 4. RELATION TO CITY PLANNING CODE.

(a) Article 11 of the City Planning Code is the basic law governing preservation of buildings and districts of architectural and environmental importance in the C-3 District of the City and County of San Francisco. This Appendix is subject to and in addition to the provisions thereof.

(b) Except as may be specifically provided to the contrary in this Code, nothing in this Appendix shall supersede, impair or modify any City Planning Code provisions applicable to property in the Front-California Conservation District including, but not limited to, regulations controlling uses, height, bulk, coverage, floor area ratio, required open space, offstreet parking and signs.

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

SEC. 5. JUSTIFICATION.

The characteristics of the Conservation District justifying its designation are as follows:

(a) History of the District. Located to the east of the financial district on filled land, this District was outside of the major downtown growth corridors in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The location of the Federal Reserve Bank on Battery Street and the construction of several office buildings (Southern Pacific, Matson) in the 1920's, linked the financial district with port-oriented buildings on lower California and Market Streets. While office uses have been located on California Street since 1906, the area east of Battery Street was not fully integrated into the financial district until 1920, when the street assumed its present character.

The development of Front Street proceeded at a slower pace and was not complete until the 1930's. Front Street was redeveloped after the fire, with warehouses and industrial buildings serving the produce district to the north and office support services serving the office core to the west and on California Street. Buildings on Front Street commonly contained stores and offices at the ground level while upper stories were used for stock purposes and general storage. Several offices and printers were also located on the street.

(b) Basic Nature of the District. The low height and small scale of this District create a contrast to the rest of the financial district and the adjacent Embarcadero Center. The District still retains its post-fire appearance, as most of the architecturally significant buildings were constructed in the short period from 1907 through 1918. Six of the District's 19 buildings are architecturally significant and six are contributory to the District. Only seven buildings are unrated. The low buildings on Front Street and the narrow lot widths create an open, sunlit streetscape. Because of the character of the District and its proximity to the financial district, a variety of commercial (especially retail) enterprises serve pedestrians from the surrounding financial district. The scale of the California Street buildings is kept low by Halleck Street, which runs parallel to California and limits the lot size on that street. The street also divides Front in half on the west side, enhancing the small scale of that block.

(c) Architectural Character. Although the Front Street buildings are lower and of lesser quality than the California Street buildings, similar design elements in the buildings tie them together to form a coherent entity. The buildings on Front Street are generally in the two- to four-story range, while most of the buildings on California Street are in the fourto seven-story range. The buildings' ornament is generally derived from Renaissance sources and the buildings employ similar scale, height, fenestration, texture, and materials.

(d) Uniqueness and Location. This district, along with the nearby Commercial-Leidesdorff District, forms one of the last small-scale areas with architecturally significant buildings in the northern section of the financial district. It provides a low-intensity contrast to the dense office core and the Embarcadero Center development.

(e) Visual and Functional Unity. The District forms a coherent entity. Outside the boundary, the older buildings become larger and are interspersed with more modern structures. The similar character and scale of the buildings unify the District.

(f) Dynamic Continuity. The area has demonstrated economic viability evidenced by its mix of active retail and commercial uses.

(g) Benefits to the City and Its Residents. The District provides a variety of retail and commercial uses in small older structures. The area is an architectural resource for its collection of small industrial buildings. The District still retains the scale and character, if not the actual Victorian buildings, of the pre-fire commercial district. (Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

SEC. 6. FEATURES.

The exterior architectural features of the Front-California District are as follows:

(a) Scale, Form, and Proportion. The buildings in this District are of a variety of heights, ranging from one story to 11 stories. Unlike other districts which have a prevailing streetwall height, this District has a varied streetwall height, allowing sunlight to penetrate to the street most of the day. Lot widths range from 25 feet to 60 feet, lot depths range from 60 feet to 140 feet.

(b) Materials, Color, Texture. Facade materials include exposed brick, stucco, metal, and terra cotta panels. Colors include white, grey masonry and terra cotta, red brick, and deep reds and greens. The texture of the buildings varies from smooth stucco to richly textured and ornamented terra cotta panels.

(c) Details. Building styles range from utilitarian brick industrial with decorative brickwork to ornate Renaissance Revival buildings. Details include glazed brickwork, arches, decorated spandrels, projecting cornices and belt courses, pilasters, and rustication.

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

SEC. 7. STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES FOR REVIEW OF NEW CONSTRUCTION AND CERTAIN ALTERATIONS.

(a) Standards. All construction of new buildings and all major alterations, which are subject to the provisions of Sections 1110, 1111 through 1111.6 and 1113, shall be compatible with the District in general with respect to the building's composition and massing, scale, materials and colors, and detailing and ornamentation, including those features described in Section 6 of this Appendix. Emphasis shall be placed on compatibility with those buildings in the area in which the new or altered building is located. In the case of major alterations, only those building characteristics that are affected by the proposed alteration shall be considered in assessing compatibility. Signs on buildings in Conservation Districts are subject to the provisions of Section 1111.7.

The foregoing standards do not require, or even encourage, new buildings to imitate the styles of the past. Rather, they require the new to be compatible with the old. The determination of compatibility shall be made in accordance with the provisions of Section 309.

• (b) Guidelines. The guidelines in this subsection are to be used in assessing compatibility.

(1) Composition and Massing. New construction should maintain the character of both Front and California Streets by relating to the prevailing height, mass, proportions, rhythm and composition of historic buildings.

The height and massing of new buildings should not alter the traditional scale of existing buildings, streets and open spaces. Since buildings on California Street commonly range from five to eight stories, new buildings should relate to those heights. Similarly, new buildings on Front Street should relate to the existing pattern of buildings under five stories in height. A setback at the predominant streetwall height can permit additional height above the setback without breaking the continuity of the streetwall.

Almost all existing buildings are built to the property or street line. This pattern, except in the case of carefully selected open spaces, should not be broken since it could damage the continuity of building rhythms and the definitions of streets.

Vertical and horizontal proportions for new buildings should be established by heights of existing streetwall and the width of existing buildings (and lots). Due to the regular rhythm of small structures on Front Street, a new building which is built on a large site should break up its facade into discrete sections that relate to the small building masses. This can be best accomplished through the use of vertical piers and separate entrances for the different sections. However, the slightly larger lots on California Street would allow buildings to have greater horizontal dimensions as well as greater heights. The use of smaller bays is another way in which to relate the proportions of a new building with those of historic buildings.

The design of a new structure should also repeat the prevailing pattern of two- and three-part vertical compositions. One-part buildings without base sections do not adequately define the pedestrian streetscape and do not relate well to the historic two- and three-part structures. This division of a building allows flexibility in the design of the ground story while encouraging a uniform treatment of the upper stories.

(2) Scale. The existing scale of the Front-California Conservation District is one of its most important assets and should be maintained. This can be accomplished by the consistent use of size and complexity of detailing in relation to surrounding buildings. In addition, the continuance of existing bay widths and the incorporation of a base element (of similar height) help to maintain the pedestrian environment. Especially on Front Street, large wall surfaces, which increase a building's scale, should be broken up through the use of detailing and textural variation to reduce the scale.

Existing fenestration (windows, entrances) rhythms and proportions which have been established by lot width or bay width should be repeated in new structures. The spacing and size of window openings should follow the sequence set by historic structures. Most glass areas should be broken up by mullions so that the scale of glazed areas is compatible with that the neighboring buildings. Casement and double-hung windows should be used where possible.

(3) Materials and Colors. The use of historic materials or those that appear similar (such as substituting concrete for stone) can link two disparate structures, or harmonize the appearance of a new structure with the architectural character of a Conservation District. The preferred surface materials for this district are brick, stone and concrete (simulated to look like terra cotta or stone).

Traditional light colors should be used in order to blend in with the character of the District. Dissimilar buildings may be made more compatible by using similar or harmonious colors, and to a lesser extent, by using similar textures. (4) Detailing and Ornamentation. A new building should relate to the surrounding area by picking up elements from surrounding buildings and repeating them or developing them for new purposes. Since most buildings on Front Street are not extensively detailed, new structures should incorporate prevailing cornice lines or belt courses. On California Street, the historic details of existing buildings can serve as models for detailing in new buildings in order to strengthen their relationship. Alternately, similarly shaped ornament can be used as detailing without directly copying historical ornament.

(Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

SEC. 8. TDR; ELIGIBILITY OF CATEGORY V BUILDINGS.

Category V Buildings in the California-Front District are eligible for the transfer of TDR as provided in Section 1109(c). (Added Ord. 414-85, App. 9/17/85)

Category V Buildings in that portion of the Mint-Mission Conservation District that is in the C-3-0 Use District as shown on Sectional Map 1 of the Zoning Map are eligible for the transfer of TDR as provided in Section 1109(c). (Added by Ord. 257-18, File No. 180724, App. 11/2/2018, Eff. 12/3/2018)