Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic Preservation Commission to submit comments on 5M draft EIR after finding preservation analysis incomplete
Summary
Planning staff presented the draft EIR for the 5M project in SoMa, which would demolish six buildings and study up to 1.8 million sq ft; commissioners said the preservation alternative lacked adequate drawings and urged a written commission comment letter and fuller analysis in the responses-to-comments document.
Planning Department staff told the San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission on Nov. 5 that the draft Environmental Impact Report for the 5M project covers roughly a 4-acre site near Fifth and Mission streets and studies two build-out schemes — an office scheme and a residential scheme — totaling as much as about 1,800,000 square feet.
"The project would result in retention and rehabilitation of the Chronicle Building at 901 to 933 Mission Street and the Dempster Building at 447–449 Minna," Planning Department EIR coordinator Michael Jacinto said, and he added that the EIR found the 430 Natoma Street building eligible for listing on the California Register and identified its demolition as a significant, unavoidable impact. "Once the site is cleared, the project would involve implementation of one of two schemes studied in the EIR," Jacinto said during his presentation.
Commissioners sharply questioned the preservation alternative and the volume of written material compared with supporting drawings. "I found this EIR to be sort of unsatisfying in terms of the preservation alternative," Commissioner Wolfram said, noting the 740-page document contained only a small number of drawings and limited study of preservation options. Wolfram and other commissioners pressed staff on why the EIR treated moving buildings off-site as a criterion and whether alternatives to demolition — including relocating historic structures within the site — had been adequately explored.
Commissioner Jeong said commissioners had expected a more complete project presentation so they could place the environmental analysis in the context of an overall vision for the site. "Environmental documents, while absolutely critical to the understanding of the project, can be kind of mechanical and functional; what you miss is an overall vision," Jeong said.
Staff said detailed responses would be provided in the comments-and-responses document and confirmed the Planning Commission will hold a hearing on the draft EIR on Nov. 20; written comments will be accepted by the Planning Department until 5 p.m. on Dec. 1, 2014. For transparency, Commissioner Hyland requested recusal from the 5M item because his firm had worked on the project; the commission moved to recuse him and recorded the recusal.
Why it matters: The project would alter several historic resources in South of Market and could result in demolition of at least one building the EIR found eligible for the California Register. The preservation commission's formal comments will be part of the public record and may prompt revisions to the draft EIR or to the project's preservation alternatives.
Next steps: Staff said it will add more detail in the comment-response document addressing commissioners' questions about alternatives, including the criteria applied to moving buildings and the limited presentation material. The Planning Commission hearing on the draft EIR is scheduled for Nov. 20; written comments on the draft EIR are due Dec. 1, 2014.
