Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Process topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board adopts findings to disapprove Planning Commission decision on Folsom/Russ conditional use authorization
Summary
The Board of Supervisors adopted findings supporting disapproval of the Planning Commission's conditional use authorization for a project at 1052–1060 Folsom Street and 190–194 Russ Street, adding a finding that the commission lacked a complete shadow study in the record.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on April 30 adopted findings in support of disapproving a Planning Commission decision that had granted a conditional use authorization for a project at 1052–1060 Folsom Street and 190–194 Russ Street.
Supervisor Aaron Peskin introduced an amendment inserting a whereas finding stating that “the planning commission did not have the benefit of a complete shadow study in the record before it at the time that it issued its findings in support of the conditional use authorization, a fact confirmed by planning department staff at the planning commission hearing on 12/20/2018.” The board voted to insert the finding and then adopted the underlying motion to adopt findings in support of disapproval.
The board also voted to excuse Supervisor Safaie from participating in the matter before voting on the substantive motion.
What the board did: the supervisors voted to adopt findings supporting disapproval of the Planning Commission's decision and amended the resolution to note an incomplete shadow study in the commission record. The board's action returns the matter to the planning process in a posture of disapproval; subsequent steps will follow consistent with land‑use procedures for disapproved planning commission actions.
Implications and limits: the action is limited to adopting findings and expressing the board's disapproval; it does not itself authorize construction. The inserted finding about the shadow study points to a procedural or evidentiary concern that the board found significant when evaluating the Planning Commission's record.
