Dozens of speakers urge planning commission to preserve Sanchez Art Center as rezoning package moves forward

Dozens of Pacifica residents, artists and small‑business owners used the public‑comment period May 19 to urge the Planning Commission to preserve the Sanchez Art Center, the Mildred Owen Concert Hall and associated campus spaces while the city’s housing‑element rezoning package is reviewed.

The most repeated request—raised by gallery volunteers, arts‑organization leaders and longtime residents—was that the city retain the center’s studio, gallery and performance functions as part of any future plan for the site (identified in the rezoning materials as Site 23). Speakers described the art center and concert hall as regional cultural assets that draw visitors, support small businesses and provide youth and senior programming.

“Preserve the Sanchez Art Center site as it is now, with the art studios, the galleries, and the concert hall,” said Julie Stock, who identified herself as a Pacifica homeowner and frequent art‑center patron. Several speakers echoed that appeal and described personal experiences: Renee Blanco said the center helped her husband engage socially through painting; Corinne Andreatta, a local art‑studio owner, told the commission the center “provides irreplaceable cultural education and economic benefits.”

“Arts equal visitation. Arts equal commerce,” said Steven Johnson, a long‑time studio tenant, who said his workshops had drawn significant visitors and revenue to the local economy.

Requests to protect the art center’s current uses were accompanied by protracted technical questions from residents about whether the rezoning package’s by‑right (ministerial) provisions could allow redevelopment without a public hearing. Several speakers including Dinah Verbi and Cindy Abbott (executive director of the Sanchez Art Center) asked commissioners to remove the site from a “by‑right” overlay or to add explicit protections so existing uses would not be lost.

Staff response and city‑owned site process

City staff responded during the hearing with clarification about public‑site process. Samantha Updegrave, the community development director, told the commission the Sanchez campus is city‑owned and “the city retains control over what happens on that site.” She said there are no current plans to demolish the art center and that any future redevelopment of a city‑owned site would require an extensive public process and City Council direction. “Any future potential development project on this site or any public site would need to undergo significant public planning process,” Updegrave said.

Public commenters pressed for stronger assurances and for explicit language in the planning or housing‑element record that would protect the building uses (galleries, studios, concert hall, dog park and playing fields). Cindy Abbott asked the commission to either remove Site 23 from the rezoning list or “modify it to ensure that every existing use at that property be maintained.” Several speakers noted letters and prior council direction memorializing the city’s intent for the campus.

By‑right (BIRATE) combining district and commissioner direction

Commissioners and city legal staff discussed the scope and limits of the by‑right combining district the staff proposed. Under state housing law certain sites that appear on multiple housing‑element cycles or otherwise satisfy statutory conditions may be eligible for ministerial (by‑right) approval if they meet statutory thresholds (for example, providing at least 20 percent lower‑income affordability and meeting minimum unit counts). Several commissioners said they believed the by‑right overlay, as drafted, covered too many sites; a number of commissioners asked the city attorney and staff to re‑check the legal requirements and limit BIRATE/ministerial designation to the specific sites the state law requires.

Public concern about infrastructure and hazards

Speakers also raised broader infrastructure and public‑safety concerns tied to large rezoning changes, including sewer capacity, traffic and evacuation routes on the coast side, and wildfire/tsunami evacuation constraints. One resident from the Fairmont HOA asked whether aging potable‑water and sewer systems would be upgraded before more housing is built; another questioned traffic capacity on Lindamar Boulevard if new units increase vehicle counts.

What the public asked the commission to do

The most common asks were: remove Site 23 from the rezoning list; add clear, enforceable language preserving gallery, studio and performance uses; require substantial public envisioning and a City Council–led RFP process before any disposal or redevelopment; and limit ministerial (by‑right) overlays to the sites specifically required by state statute.

Next steps

The Planning Commission did not remove Site 23 and did not adopt any language specifically protecting the art center during the May 19 meeting. Staff said it will incorporate public testimony into the project record and that council direction will be required for any public‑site redevelopment. Commissioners also asked staff and the city attorney to further analyze which sites must be subject to ministerial review under state law and to return with revised materials before the next hearing.

Speakers and roles (selection)

Speakers who addressed the Sanchez Art Center issue included Julie Stock (resident), Renee Blanco (resident and volunteer), Andrew Leone (community member and performer), Corinne Andreatta (small‑business owner, Start the Art), Cindy Abbott (executive director, Sanchez Art Center), Steven Johnson (studio tenant), Paul Snodgrass (resident), Michael Watkins (Fairmont HOA), Dinah Verbi (resident), and several other longtime community volunteers and organization representatives.

How to follow up

Staff noted public comments may also be submitted via the city’s standard public comment email (publiccomment@pacifica.gov) and that the commission will continue deliberations on the rezoning package at a later meeting. Members of the public seeking to monitor next steps should watch the Planning Commission meeting notices and the Community Development Department updates for the packet that will include staff’s responses and any revised zoning language.