Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 430 Main Street topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission approves revised 430 Main Street plan with 45‑foot protective notch
Summary
After months of negotiation with neighbors, the commission approved a modified downtown project authorization for 430 Main Street requiring a 45‑foot‑wide, four‑story central notch to protect light and air for the adjacent Baycrest courtyard; the vote was 5‑1.
The San Francisco Planning Commission on May 24 approved a revised downtown project authorization for 430 Main Street in Rincon Hill, adopting conditions intended to preserve light and air to the adjacent Baycrest condominium courtyard while preserving most of the project’s housing capacity.
The commission voted 5‑1 to approve the project after a contentious hearing that juxtaposed a staff‑preferred two‑tower scheme and the developer’s partially split‑building compromise. Staff architect David Winslow told commissioners that the split‑building concept “yields approximately 92,000 square feet of net rentable” area under the department’s assumptions, while the project sponsor’s analysis produced a slightly higher figure; the two sides disputed unit counts and livability metrics during the hearing.
The approved motion requires a central open notch 45 feet wide across the topmost floors, measured from the Main Street elevation, and other conditions read into the record by staff. Commissioners also added a materials/railing requirement intended to limit opaque glass railings on the notch terraces. Commissioner Fong moved the approval; the motion passed with Commissioner Moore opposed.
Neighbors and residents of the Baycrest condominium urged a design that would maintain courtyard light and vegetation during several hours of public testimony. Cecilia Lemmott, HOA president for Baycrest, said the planning department design provided a preferable compromise that “gives us more housing and it respects our open space.” Residents testified that courtyard size and tree canopy make the open‑space protections especially important to their building’s livability.
Sponsor Ross Stackhouse said the partial split approach represented a compromise that retained unit size and livability while creating openings for light and views; he characterized the proposal as a way to deliver housing without creating substandard units. Winslow and the planning staff emphasized that a fully split solution required additional mechanical and egress space that would reduce rentable area and worsen unit layouts.
The commission’s conditions also direct the sponsor to document final dimensions and to incorporate the staff‑read wording establishing the notch measurement from Main Street and the required non‑glass (open) railing approach for the notch. The decision follows two previous hearings in which the commission asked staff and the sponsor to produce alternate massing and floor‑plan options.
Next steps: the sponsor will submit final plans reflecting the commission’s conditions for staff verification before permits proceed.
