Supervisors approve amended conditional-use permit for 1310 Junipero Serra after neighbor agreement

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on May 20 approved a revised conditional-use authorization for a one‑story maintenance building proposed at 1310 Junipero Serra Boulevard after the project sponsor and nearby neighbors reached an agreement that adds construction and safety conditions.

Supervisor Melgar moved to approve the revised conditional‑use authorization with specific conditions negotiated with stakeholders; the motion carried on a roll‑call vote of 11-0. The board earlier approved a separate motion related to the environmental appeal and tabled related items while finalizing the revised conditions.

The agreement, presented to the board by Ryan Patterson, attorney for Friends of St. Thomas More, and accepted by counsel for the San Francisco Golf Club, adds the following measures as conditions of approval: routing construction traffic away from St. Thomas More Way when feasible; conducting tree removal outside typical instructional hours or during summer recess; applying water to active earth‑moving areas at least three times daily on work days to limit dust; complying with health‑code dust‑control provisions and establishing an on‑site hotline for fugitive‑dust reports; developing a construction emergency and particulate response plan; complying with Department of Building Inspection and Fire Department requirements regarding fire prevention and suppression, including an enhanced fire suppression system for stored lithium‑ion batteries; meeting San Francisco Public Utilities Commission stormwater requirements; and designing and installing an audio/visual alarm on the northern elevation that alerts the neighboring school if a smoke or fire alarm is activated in the new building.

“We have reached an agreement,” Ryan Patterson told the board when he described the negotiated protections for the school next door. John Kevlin, representing the San Francisco Golf Club, also told the board the sponsor was “comfortable moving forward with this project” with the new conditions.

Board action came after the clerk announced that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) appeal had been withdrawn and that items 22 and 26 had been held and filed. The board approved item 23 — affirming the planning department’s exemption determination — and tabled items 24 and 25. Later, after Supervisor Melgar read the additional conditions into the record and moved to amend item 28, the board approved item 28 as amended and item 29 and tabled item 27; the amendment and subsequent approval passed 11-0.

Public comment was opened and no members of the public offered testimony after the parties reported they had reached an agreement. The board's action incorporates several of the negotiated protections directly into the conditional‑use authorization as conditions of approval, rather than leaving them solely to a separate private agreement.

The project, as described in the planning staff materials and at the hearing, would demolish nine small maintenance structures and construct a roughly one‑story maintenance building (planners cited a project footprint around 19,100–20,000 gross square feet in materials transmitted to the board). The lodging of conditions tied to construction sequencing, dust control, stormwater, and enhanced fire suppression specifically addressed concerns raised by the adjacent St. Thomas More School and the neighboring golf club.

The board’s file shows the motions and amendments recorded in the hearing: the CEQA appeal was withdrawn, administrative items related to the exemption were acted on, and the conditional‑use authorization was revised and approved with the added conditions. Implementation now proceeds through the planning and permitting process, including compliance checks by DBI and the Fire Department as required by the added conditions.

The clerk recorded the approvals and tables under the board’s consent procedures; the vote on the amended conditional‑use authorization was unanimous. Next steps identified in the hearing record include finalization of construction drawings and specific permitting reviews by building and fire officials prior to issuance of permits.

The rest of the board’s May 20 meeting included the adoption of many consent resolutions and several other separate items (see “Votes at a glance”), as well as ceremonial commendations and memorials.