Planning commission initiates Potrero Power Station general‑plan amendments after sponsor outlines 30% affordable housing

San Francisco Planning Commission · September 5, 2019

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Planning staff and the project sponsor presented a 29‑acre mixed‑use Potrero Power Station redevelopment; the commission voted to initiate general‑plan amendments and a hearing was set to consider amendments and approvals in October. The sponsor highlighted 30% below‑market units (no public subsidy), preservation of Station A, open space and workforce commitments.

San Francisco Planning Department staff and the private project sponsor presented the Potrero Power Station redevelopment and asked the Planning Commission to initiate general‑plan amendments to allow the project to proceed. The commission voted to schedule a public hearing to consider the amendments on or after Oct. 10, 2019.

The presentation described a 29‑acre mixed‑use plan on the central waterfront south of Pier 70. John Francis, senior planner and project introducer, said staff recommends amending the Central Waterfront and related plan elements to align the general plan with the proposed project and associated new community resources. John Lau of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development told the commission the proposal is being advanced as a development agreement project so the city can “memorialize… the public benefits package” in contract form.

Enrique Landa, the project sponsor, outlined what he called a transformed waterfront: roughly 2,600 residential units, 30% of those units to be provided at below‑market rates without direct public subsidy, and about two‑thirds of the affordable units to be delivered on site. Landa said the project would also provide about seven acres of new open space, connect the Bay Trail and Blue Greenway, construct an on‑site community center (the team is in talks with the YMCA), add space for a full‑service grocery store, two on‑site child‑care facilities and a suite of workforce programs aimed at both construction and long‑term jobs. "We've been able to negotiate the package that delivers 30% of all residential units in this project at below market rates," Landa said.

Speakers from neighborhood groups and nonprofit partners largely praised the package but flagged enforceability and phasing concerns. Susan Eslick, a Dogpatch resident, told commissioners she supports the plan’s preservation of the stack and Station A, its waterfront access and the 30% affordability target. JR Eppler, president of the Potrero Boosters Neighborhood Association, asked staff and the sponsor to manage long‑term risks—such as ownership of adjacent parcels like the PG&E block—and urged mechanisms to pull promised benefits forward so residents see them sooner.

Project leaders acknowledged those concerns. Lau said the development agreement will obligate the sponsor to provide physical improvements associated with sub‑areas even if specific sub‑parcels are not controlled by the sponsor, and the sponsor indicated it is exploring ways to phase key pieces earlier. Landa said the project team had hosted extensive outreach (he cited many events and tours) and added a new partnership to provide 36 deeply affordable units for clients of a homeless prenatal program.

Next steps: the commission voted unanimously to initiate the proposed general‑plan amendments and to schedule a public hearing to consider adoption and related approvals on or after Oct. 10, 2019. If the amendments are initiated, staff said the planning commission would return on Oct. 10 to consider general‑plan amendments, final EIR certification, the special‑use district and related approvals; Board of Supervisors hearings would follow in the fall or early winter.

Why it matters: The project repurposes a long‑closed power plant site and, if approved, would add thousands of homes, a substantial share of below‑market units claimed by the sponsor to be achieved without direct city subsidy, and multiple public amenities that city staff say will require zoning and map changes to implement.