Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the 301 Sixth Street topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Joint commissions approve shadow authorization for 301 Sixth Street project near Jean Friend Recreation Center

San Francisco Planning Commission and Recreation and Park Commission (joint hearing) · October 5, 2017
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

The Planning Commission and Recreation and Park Commission unanimously approved raising the cumulative shadow limit to permit a revised 8-story mixed-use project at 301 Sixth Street after sponsors reduced upper-floor massing and negotiated community benefits including increased BMR units and programming funds.

On Oct. 5, 2017, the San Francisco Planning Commission and Recreation and Park Commission unanimously approved actions to accommodate new shadow from a proposed 8-story mixed-use building at 301 Sixth Street and to adopt related findings and a large project authorization.

Planning staff, led by Ella Simonsky, told the commissions the project would demolish an existing one-story car wash and surface lot and build an eight-story mixed-use building with 95 dwelling units, about 5,800 square feet of ground-floor commercial space and roughly 7,600 square feet of open space. Simonsky said the sponsor voluntarily increased on-site below‑market‑rate (BMR) housing to roughly 16% of units and described requested exceptions (rear yard, dwelling exposure and off-street parking) covered in a draft section 3.29 motion.

Jordan Harrison of the Recreation and Park Department presented the shadow analysis and framed the vote under the City's sunlight ordinance (Planning Code section 2.95) and the 1989 joint implementation memorandum. Harrison summarized the quantitative result supplied to commissioners: "there is a 0.076% increase in shadow of the total available annual sunlight for the park," with the largest single new shading moment identified near 7:44 a.m. on the representative date and an average new-shadow duration of roughly one hour.

Project representatives said they revised the design after the May hearing to reduce shadowing by setting back the top two floors. Jody Knight, speaking for the sponsor, said the team "really worked hard to minimize that shadow" and described negotiated community benefits: an increase in on-site BMR units above the code requirement, a long-term (25-year) commitment to offer ground-floor commercial space below market rent for a neighborhood-serving tenant, local hiring commitments and contributions for youth programming and services. When Commissioner Anderson asked about oversight of the approximately $504,000 in community contributions referenced in discussion, the sponsor said payments would be staggered with project approvals and that recipient community groups would determine how to allocate funds.

Public comment was largely supportive after negotiated outreach. Multiple neighborhood organizations and labor representatives—including SoMa Pilipinas, Carpenters Local 22, the Veterans Equity Center, West Bay Filipino Multi Service Center, United Players and Friends of Jean Friend Park—spoke in favor, citing design changes, added BMR units and community benefits.

Commissioner Fong moved to approve the joint action to raise the cumulative shadow limit for Jean Friend Recreation Center; Commissioner Moore seconded. The Planning Commission recorded a unanimous vote (5 to 0) in favor, and the Recreation and Park Commission likewise voted unanimously that the project "will not have a significant adverse impact." The Planning Commission subsequently adopted the findings and the large project authorization for the related items by unanimous vote. The record shows the commissions approved the project based on the submitted shadow studies, the design revisions and the community benefit commitments.

The commissions left remaining procedural items on the calendar for later Planning Commission consideration, and the Recreation and Park Commission adjourned its participation after the joint actions.