The San Francisco City Council convened on July 4, 2025, to discuss the approval of a new affordable housing project at 2550 Irving Street, amidst concerns regarding environmental safety and contamination. The meeting focused on the implications of Senate Bill 35 (SB 35), which streamlines the approval process for qualifying housing developments.

The discussion began with a presentation emphasizing that the ministerial approval pathway under SB 35 does not exempt the project from existing city and state environmental regulations. Officials reassured attendees that the Department of Public Health (DPH) and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) would continue to oversee environmental safety and cleanup efforts. They encouraged community members to engage with DTSC regarding contamination concerns, asserting confidence in the regulatory processes in place.

Tina Tam from the planning department detailed the project, which aims to construct a seven-story building with 90 units designated for households earning between 30-80% of the area’s median income. The project has received several waivers and concessions from standard development regulations, including height increases due to its proximity to major transit stops. The planning department concluded that these adjustments would not adversely impact health or safety.

Commissioner Trezvina raised questions about the project's compliance with health standards, particularly regarding the presence of tetrachloroethylene (PCE) vapors, a concern highlighted in a resolution by the Board of Supervisors. The planning department clarified that they rely on expert assessments from DPH and DTSC to determine health impacts, emphasizing that measurable standards must be met to classify any adverse effects.

Master Green from the Department of Building Inspection confirmed that the site permit for the project was issued following thorough review and that construction could not commence until further approvals were granted. He noted that the appeal raised technical concerns that would be better addressed by DPH and DTSC.

DTSC representatives provided insights into their oversight of the site, confirming that monitoring during demolition showed compliance with safety standards and that no significant sources of PCE were found on-site. They reiterated that the project poses no environmental or public health risks and recommended denying the appeal against the project.

The meeting concluded with a consensus on the importance of adhering to established environmental regulations while advancing the development of affordable housing. The council's decision to proceed with the project reflects a commitment to addressing housing needs while ensuring community safety and environmental integrity. Further discussions and follow-up actions are expected as the project moves forward.