Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing 1900 Diamond topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission approves 24-home Diamond Heights project after wide public input and design changes
Summary
After extensive neighborhood outreach and dozens of public callers, the commission approved a planned-unit development and conditional-use authorization for 1900 Diamond Street, a 24-unit infill project that preserves mature Monterey cypress trees, adds a public stairway and viewing platform, and will pay fees to generate additional affordable housing.
The San Francisco Planning Commission voted unanimously 7–0 on Feb. 3 to approve a planned-unit development and conditional-use authorization for 1900 Diamond Street, a proposal to convert an undeveloped three-quarter‑acre hillside into 24 family‑size dwelling units and public amenities.
Planning staff recommended approval with conditions, saying the design preserves 10 mature Monterey cypress trees, reduces curb cuts, adds a publicly accessible stair and viewing platform, and includes public‑realm improvements. Gabriela Pinto, the department staffer presenting the case, said the project will ‘‘develop a currently undeveloped lot and construct a new residential development’’ and that the department found the proposal consistent with applicable planning code standards and a Class 32 CEQA categorical exemption.
Project sponsor Mark Babson said the design evolved after more than 30 stakeholder meetings and extensive negotiations with neighborhood groups; he described the revised plan as a ‘‘compromise’’ that preserves important trees and creates public benefits while adding 24 family‑size homes near transit. Babson told commissioners the project will also generate funds for affordable housing: ‘‘The project will also result in 11 affordable homes being created through the fees we’re paying to the mayor’s office of housing,’’ he said.
The hearing drew a large public turnout by phone and a mix of endorsements and objections. Supporters — including neighborhood associations, environmental groups and individual residents — praised the outreach and the project’s family‑size units. ‘‘This project will provide 24 new units, 21 of those would be 3‑bedroom units,’’ said resident Matt Benz, noting the city’s shortage of family housing.
Opponents argued the parcel has a history of redevelopment constraints and called for a full CEQA review and more on‑site affordability. Attorney Sarah Lee Pennington said a regulatory agreement tied to the parcel ‘‘stipulates its use was specifically designated until 2059 for affordable rental housing’’ and urged commissioners to deny the exemption and subject the proposal to fuller environmental review.
Commissioners weighed those concerns against the outcome of a lengthy public process that, several members said, produced meaningful changes. Commissioner Diamond described the project as ‘‘a case study’’ in balancing neighborhood improvements with citywide housing goals and moved to approve with conditions; the motion passed 7–0.
The department will finalize conditions of approval and the project sponsor will proceed to the local entitlement steps outlined by planning staff.
