Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors appeal CEQA exemption for proposed four‑story home at 617 Sanchez; Planning Dept. defends review
Summary
Neighbors and engineers urged the Board to require further environmental review of a proposed four‑story house at 617 Sanchez Street, citing slope stability, hazardous fill and historic concerns; Planning staff said the project qualifies for a categorical exemption and building‑permit reviews will address geotechnical issues.
The Board of Supervisors heard extensive public testimony Dec. 1 in an appeal of the Planning Department’s categorical exemption for a proposed project at 617 Sanchez Street in Dolores Heights. Appellants — neighbors and a civil engineer — asked the board to reverse the exemption and require a full environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), citing site slope, soils borings and possible hazardous fill from historic grading as well as historic‑resource questions.
Appellant Joerg Rathenberg said a modest 113‑year‑old house proposed for demolition had ties to long‑time African American and LGBTQ homeowners and that the lot’s steepness and grading raised concerns about slope stability and the adequacy of geotechnical investigation. Engineer Patrick Buskovich said the topography exceeds 25 percent slope where the proposed excavation would remove roughly 600 cubic yards of soil and reach 16 feet of depth, arguing the geotechnical borings had been taken in the backyard rather than at the front of lot where construction would occur.
Planning Department staff and the project sponsor countered that a project‑specific geotechnical report was prepared by a licensed engineer and that the building department will review final plans to ensure structural safety and compliance with Slope and Seismic Hazard Zone rules if triggered. Planning staff also said the site is not in the Maher hazardous‑fill area and that the project’s aesthetic impacts cannot be considered under CEQA for an infill residential project inside a transit priority area; design review addressed some special‑use district concerns.
After hearing roughly an hour of public testimony and technical argument, the board voted to affirm Planning’s categorical‑exemption determination as modified to reflect revised plans (which now include an accessory dwelling unit) and tabled the related conditional reversal motions for further work. Supervisor Rafael Mandelman offered the motion to affirm as amended; the vote to approve the Planning Department’s exemption (item 52 as amended) passed on a roll call 11‑0.
The appellants said they planned additional submission of materials and raised questions about the scope of borings, groundwater, hazardous materials permits and potential effects on private views and the Castro LGBTQ Cultural District. Planning staff said preservation review did not find the property eligible for the California Register under the four statutory criteria and that additional environmental review was not required under CEQA.
