Planning department rescinds CEQA categorical exemption for Folsom Street project; supervisors table hearing after public concern over PG&E pipeline

The San Francisco Planning Department told the Board of Supervisors on Jan. 24 that it had rescinded a categorical exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for a proposed project at 3516–3526 Folsom Street, citing the need for additional analysis of potential vibratory impacts on a nearby Pacific Gas & Electric transmission pipeline. The board then tabled the hearing on the appeal while staff investigates the question.

Acting environmental review officer Lisa Gibson told the board the department had rescinded the exemption "after consideration of the facts that were before us," saying in particular that "this concern merits further investigation" regarding construction‑generated ground vibration and the PG&E Pipeline 109 proximity. Gibson said two letters dated Dec. 2 and Dec. 12 provided supplemental information the department needed to analyze and that the department concluded additional study was warranted.

The issue drew sharp public comment from neighbors and community groups who said the pipeline and steep site topography raised safety concerns. "We feel it is really time to just say we need an environmental review," Kathy Angus, a Bernal Heights neighborhood organizer, told the board. Other residents and community groups cited potential corrosion and the site's steep grade, and urged an Environmental Impact Report to fully assess risk to the pipeline and nearby homes.

The project sponsor's attorney said the applicants have been attempting to move forward for more than three years and warned that further delays would add months to an already protracted process. Project counsel said the applicants were prepared to comply with whatever safety reviews PG&E requires but criticized the last‑minute withdrawal of the exemption after a continuance was discussed.

Recusal and procedural questions: Earlier in the hearing Supervisor Safaie requested to be excused because of a conflict related to prior professional work; the board handled multiple procedural motions before accepting a final recusal and proceeding. After the planning department’s announcement, the board moved to table the items so staff can conduct the additional analysis and prepare a revised record for review.

Motion and vote: Supervisor Hillary Ronan made the motion to table items 36–39; the motion passed with supervisors voting in favor and Supervisor Safaie excused from the vote. The clerk recorded the tally as 10 ayes (one member excused) when the board tabled the matter.

What happens next: Staff said planning will conduct further analysis on potential vibratory impacts related to excavation and bedrock conditions near the pipeline and return with findings. Appellants and project sponsors both told the board they would be prepared to offer additional materials; appellants said they expect an Environmental Impact Report may be required.

Public and legal context: Appellants and neighbors said the pipeline's location and potential for vibration in bedrock conditions create an "unusual circumstance" that under CEQA can defeat a categorical exemption. Planning staff said it rescinded the categorical exemption specifically to allow that further analysis. Appellants' counsel said the rescission made the hearing moot for the day and supported the board's tabling action.

Ending: The board left the matter tabled to allow the planning department to do the further environmental work it said was needed; the project remains pending and could return to the board when the department completes the supplemental analysis.