PUC delays vote on Visitation Valley development agreement after public health and remediation concerns

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission on June 10 continued action on a development agreement with Visitation Development LLC after extended public comment and commissioner questions about contamination, remediation oversight and protections for workers and future residents.

Deputy General Manager Michael Carlin introduced the development agreement (DDA) for the 20-acre Schlage/Locksite in Visitation Valley and described the PUC’s anticipated role: the commission would review and sign off on infrastructure plans (water, wastewater, stormwater and emergency water supply) as they are prepared.

Ken Rich of the Mayor’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development said the mayor supports the project as a way to produce middle‑income housing and described long-running work to make the project financially feasible after the dissolution of the redevelopment agency. Rich said the site had been remediated under supervision of the State Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and that DTSC had signed off on the remedial action plan.

Jonathan Scharfman, general manager for Universal Paragon and Visitation Development, described roughly $20 million of private investment in remediation and said DTSC certified the remedial action plan and issued findings of suitability for development for most of the site. He described soil and groundwater remediation measures, including an enhanced reductive dechlorination program that used injections (sodium lactate) to treat a groundwater plume, and said DTSC and other agencies provided oversight.

Residents and advocates — including Doctor Espinosa Jackson and others from Bayview Hunters Point and Visitation Valley — urged the commission to delay any vote, saying they remain concerned about residual contamination, potential health impacts and the adequacy of oversight. Public speakers described historic contamination, questioned whether sites should be treated as Superfund locations versus brownfields, and asked for more detail on long-term protections for residents and construction workers.

Commissioners asked for clarifying information about soil capping, groundwater controls, worker protections during construction, DTSC oversight and how infrastructure acceptance by the city would affect future liability. Noreen Nambro from the City Attorney’s Office and other staff explained that environmental mitigation measures were documented in the project’s EIR and that DTSC, the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the city’s Department of Public Health play roles in sign-off and monitoring.

Given the questions raised, the commission voted to continue Item 12 to the next meeting and asked staff to invite DTSC and the Department of Public Health to respond to commissioners’ specific technical questions and to provide more detail on soil/groundwater mitigations and protections for workers and residents.

The continuation was approved by voice vote; staff will return with the requested technical representatives and additional materials at the next hearing.