Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Draft EIR finds 'significant unavoidable' historic impacts if 1028 Market Street is demolished; commissioners urge compatible design
Summary
Planning staff told the Preservation Commission the draft EIR for 1028 Market Street finds two project‑level, significant unavoidable impacts to the Market Street Theater & Loft District from demolition and new construction; commissioners urged the compatible‑design or partial‑preservation alternatives and called for richer interpretive mitigation.
The San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission on Oct. 19 heard a presentation on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for 1028 Market Street, a proposed 13‑story building that would replace an early‑20th‑century commercial structure in the Market Street Theater and Loft National Register Historic District.
Rachel Schutt, EIR coordinator in the Planning Department, said the proposed project would demolish the existing building and construct a 127‑foot, 13‑story structure with up to 186 residential units and ground‑floor commercial space. "The draft EIR concluded that the proposed project would result in two project‑level significant unavoidable impacts to historic resources," Schutt said, identifying impacts from demolition and from the size and scale of new construction to the Market Street Theater and Loft District.
The DEIR identifies two mitigation measures for demolition: a Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) documentation package including measured drawings and photography, and a permanent interpretive display about the original building and the district. Schutt said no feasible mitigation has been identified to eliminate the substantial adverse effects from constructing a replacement building that is incompatible in size and scale.
Public commenter Lisa Zahnor, executive director of Urban Solutions and president of the Alamo Square Neighborhood Association, urged the commission to balance preservation with housing needs. "There's an opportunity to build a bigger building and provide more housing and at the same time put some sort of interpretive program ... that acknowledges and protects and celebrates the history of the neighborhood," she said.
Commissioners raised concerns about the proposed project's scale and design rhythm. Commissioner Pearlman and others said they preferred the compatible‑design alternative or the partial‑preservation alternative because those choices reduce impacts to the district's character. Commissioners also pressed staff to ensure that any interpretive displays required as mitigation be substantive and visible, not limited to a recessed lobby or roof‑deck exhibit.
The Planning Department reminded the commission that the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the Draft EIR on Oct. 27 and that written comments will be accepted through 5 p.m. on Nov. 7. The Preservation Commission's comments will be included in the Planning Department's comments and responses document that will appear before certification.
No formal motion or vote on a preservation recommendation was taken at the Oct. 19 hearing; commissioners signaled preferences and requested stronger mitigation and clearer design adjustments in the alternatives analysis.
