Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Ceqa topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board upholds Planning Departmentcategorical exemption for 590 Leland project after hour-long appeal

3006209 · April 16, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously upheld the Planning Department's categorical exemption under CEQA for a proposed project at 590 Leland Avenue, allowing demolition of an existing church and construction of five single-family homes to proceed.

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously upheld the Planning Department's categorical exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act for a proposed project at 590 Leland Avenue, affirming the Planning Commission's earlier approval and allowing the demolition of an existing church and construction of five single-family homes to proceed.

The decision, made on a motion by Supervisor Cohen and seconded by Supervisor Tang, came after an appeal by the Visitation Valley Planning Alliance that argued the project would block views from public parkland, harm biological resources and reduce accessible open space near McLaren Park. "This project is a threat to open space and the Greenway," appellant Fran Martin told the board during the appeal hearing.

The Planning Department, represented by senior environmental planner Josh Pollock, told supervisors that the project was classified as an infill development eligible for a Class 32 exemption and that agency field surveys did not find the San Francisco spineflower or California croton on the project parcel. "The categorical exemption for the project was appropriately issued," Pollock said, summarizing the department's written response that the appellant had not presented substantial evidence of significant environmental impacts requiring further review. Environmental review officer Lisa Gibson reiterated that, under state law, qualifying infill projects are not required to undergo CEQA review for aesthetics and visual resources in the manner ordinarily required.

Appellants disputed that the site qualifies as an infill lot and pointed to photographs and a community view analysis they submitted. Fran Martin said the parcel sits within a larger open corridor now used by residents and elders and argued that home construction would "bisect" the neighborhood's remaining public open space and block views used by John King Senior Housing residents and others.

Project sponsor David Rubinstein said the property was purchased on the open market, described the parcel as five subdivided lots created in 2014, and said the project team had worked with the Planning Department and community groups through pre-design and discretionary review. Rubinstein said the sponsor had delayed construction, met repeatedly with neighborhood representatives and waived rent for nonprofit users of the site. He also noted the Planning Commission conducted discretionary review and unanimously approved the project on Jan. 18, 2018.

Planning staff told the board that two California croton plants were observed on adjacent Recreation and Parks property but not on the project lot; the department said construction staging would be limited to the property frontage and that fencing and setbacks would avoid disturbance to adjacent plants. The department also said proposed buildings would range roughly 24 to 32 feet in height and therefore not trigger planning-code shadow rules that apply to structures exceeding 40 feet.

After hearing testimony from community speakers on both sides and a planning-department presentation, Supervisor Cohen moved to affirm the Planning Department's categorical-exemption determination (Item 48) and table Items 49 and 50; the motion passed 11'0'0'00. "This is a CEQA appeal with a limited scope," Cohen said, urging colleagues to decide only whether the department's exemption was supported by substantial evidence. The roll-call vote recorded 11 ayes, and the board's action affirmed the exemption.

Votes at a glance

- Item 48 (Motion to affirm Planning Department categorical exemption for 590 Leland Ave.): Motion by Supervisor Cohen; seconded by Supervisor Tang; vote 11-0 to affirm. Items 49 and 50 (conditional reversal or direction to prepare findings) were tabled.

What happens next

With the categorical exemption affirmed, the project sponsor may proceed with the approvals already granted by the Planning Commission unless further legal action is filed. The board's decision was limited to the CEQA exemption and did not authorize building permits; those remain subject to administrative permit processes and conditions imposed by the Planning Commission.

Provenance

- Topic introduction: transcript block beginning at 3607.1501, which opens the 3:00 p.m. special order hearing covering Items 47'50, including the appeal. Evidence excerpt: "Items 47 through 50 comprise the appeal of determination of exemption from environmental review for 590 Leland Avenue..." (block_id "3607.1501", local_start 0, local_end 286, evidence_excerpt provided).

- Topic finish: transcript block beginning at 7269.9697, where the board roll-call vote affirms the categorical exemption: "Colleagues, the categorical exemption is finally affirmed and this motion was approved unanimously." (block_id "7269.9697", local_start 0, local_end 120, evidence_excerpt provided).