Historic Preservation Commission delays environmental 'standard requirements' ordinance after remote‑hearing concerns

The San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission on April 15, 2020 voted unanimously to continue consideration of a proposed Standard Environmental Requirements (SER) ordinance after staff presented the measure and members of the public raised concerns about access to the remote hearing and the ordinance’s potential effects on public participation under CEQA.

Veronica Flores of the Planning Department outlined the ordinance as a proposal to codify frequently applied mitigation measures so they would apply more consistently — and, in some cases, to ministerial projects not otherwise subject to CEQA review. Flores said the SER program is intended to increase consistency, transparency and, when appropriate, time savings in environmental review, and that cultural-resource and vibration-related SERs would return to the Historic Preservation Commission for further review.

The staff presentation prompted sustained questioning from commissioners about how SERs would affect historic resources and whether an Environmental Impact Report would still be required where impacts could not be reduced to less-than-significant levels. Allison Vanderslice, department staff, said the department would still require an EIR in cases such as demolition of an individual historic resource and that the measure would not eliminate existing alternatives or EIR review when needed.

Public commenters urged delay. Richard Drury, who said he submitted a written comment on behalf of an organization, told the commission: "This is a highly controversial proposal, and we believe that it should be continued" and said he believed the procedure "violates the Brown Act" because COVID‑19 limits participation. Bradley Angel of Green Action for Health and Environmental Justice said notices were not multilingual and that non‑English speakers have been denied access; several callers said they had been disconnected during the presentation.

City Attorney Andrea said that under the mayoral and gubernatorial emergency orders this remote meeting did not by itself violate the Brown Act, and that the city attorney’s office had issued public guidance; she added that the commission retained discretion to continue the item. Planning staff responded that SERs would not weaken CEQA protections and that some projects could receive greater protections because standard requirements could be applied to projects that are ministerial and currently outside CEQA.

After deliberation and in light of technical problems that impeded some callers, Commissioner Perlman moved to continue the SER ordinance to the commission’s next hearing on May 6, 2020; the motion was seconded and passed by unanimous roll call, 7–0. Staff said they would accept written comments, respond to questions and return with cultural‑resource SER drafts for additional review.

The item remains active and will next be considered on May 6, 2020; staff said they will present further drafts of SERs related to archaeological and tribal cultural resources for commission review before any final action.