Board conditionally reverses certification of FEIR for 469 Stevenson Street after appeals over historic impacts, seismic analysis and displacement

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Oct. 26 voted 8–3 to conditionally reverse the Planning Commission’s certification of the final environmental impact report for a proposed 27‑story mixed‑use building at 469 Stevenson Street and directed staff to prepare findings supporting that reversal.

The motion, carried after a full hearing with more than two dozen public speakers on both sides, requires the board’s written findings explaining the reversal of the FEIR certification and the planning commission’s action. The reversal followed appeals by neighborhood groups and preservation advocates who said the EIR did not adequately analyze seismic and geotechnical risk, impacts on multiple nearby historic districts — including the Old Mint and Mint Plaza — and the potential for gentrification and displacement that could produce additional, downstream environmental impacts.

Appellants argued the EIR improperly “scoped out” detailed analysis of subsurface and foundation options and therefore deprived reviewers of the opportunity to require pile foundations or other mitigations to address differential settlement and liquefaction risks. “You cannot do that today. You don't have that authority because of the way it was done,” said appellant John Eberling of the Yerba Buena Neighborhood Consortium during rebuttal remarks, citing concerns about uneven settlement like that seen at other tall‑building sites in the city.

Architectural‑history expert Catherine Petron and preservation groups urged the board to account for the building’s size and context. Petron said the site sits at the confluence of several historic districts, including the Mint‑Mission Conservation District and the Filipino Cultural Heritage District, and that the EIR’s analysis of setting and scale was insufficient. “The proposed tower is incompatible with the historic setting,” Petron told the board.

Project supporters — including Build, Inc., project counsel and a coalition of neighborhood and labor groups that negotiated a community benefits package — said the development would replace a surface parking lot with 495 new housing units, provide on‑site and off‑site affordable units, and include community space and funding for local programs. Lou Vasquez of Build said the project will enable the production of roughly 143 permanently affordable homes using a combined on‑site inclusionary component, an in‑lieu fee and a donated parcel, plus ground‑floor nonprofit and community space. Labor groups told the board the project would create hundreds of union construction jobs.

Planning department staff told the board the EIR met CEQA standards, that the draft EIR and responses to comments considered the issues raised, and that geotechnical review and final foundation design properly fall under the building‑permit and structural peer‑review process administered by the Department of Building Inspection (DBI). Jenny Delumo, senior planner, said the EIR examined alternatives and that the planning commission, as a body, voted to certify the study on July 29, 2021.

City attorneys clarified the scope of the board’s review: certification of an EIR by an unelected decision‑making body may be appealed to the elected board, but the board’s review is limited to whether the FEIR complies with CEQA’s standards for adequacy and disclosure. Substantive approvals and CEQA findings tied to a discretionary project approval are distinct matters and can be appealed only through the underlying approvals unless the appellant also appealed those approvals.

In the end, the board majority concluded the EIR did not adequately study one or more of the concerns raised and directed staff to prepare findings for the conditional reversal. The motion to reverse and direct findings was moved by Supervisor Peskin, seconded by Supervisor Ronan, and passed 8–3. The board directed preparation of written findings; those findings will spell out the specific inadequacies the board identified and the remedies or further analysis required.

Key project details from the record: the proposal calls for demolition of an existing surface parking lot and construction of a 27‑story tower with 495 dwelling units, ground‑floor retail, private and common open space, and three below‑grade parking levels with 166 parking spaces; the project sponsor has proposed roughly 73 on‑site below‑market units plus further affordable housing through in‑lieu payments and donation of a parcel, a package that sponsors say will produce about 143 permanently affordable homes altogether.

What happens next: the board’s direction to prepare findings begins a formal step in which staff will prepare the written rationale for reversal and any required additional environmental analysis or mitigation. Those written findings will be returned to the board and published as part of the official record; further actions, including possible project modifications or supplemental environmental review, may follow.

(Reporting note: direct quotations are drawn from the Oct. 26, 2021 board meeting transcript.)