Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Potrero Eir topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission delays certification of Potrero Hope SF EIR to Dec. 10 amid relocation questions
Summary
The Planning Commission agreed to continue certification of the Potrero Hope SF final EIR/EIS to Dec. 10 after commissioners and public raised concerns about alignment of project approvals, relocation plans and legal risk. Staff said HUD’s federal process can move forward while the commission considers local timing.
The San Francisco Planning Commission voted on Oct. 22 to continue consideration of the final environmental impact report and environmental impact statement (EIR/EIS) for the Potrero Hope SF master‑plan project until Dec. 10, giving commissioners more time to align environmental certification with future project approvals and to seek additional detail on resident relocation.
Rachel Schutt of the Planning Department told commissioners the hearing before the commission was limited to certification of the final EIR/EIS for Department case number 201000515E and that no project approvals were requested that day. Staff’s final document identifies significant unavoidable environmental impacts related to transit capacity, intersection delay, exterior noise and construction‑period air pollution and notes that adoption of the EIR would require a statement of overriding considerations under CEQA if the commission later approves the project.
During public comment, residents and community organizers urged the commission to move quickly. Azuri Peace Green, who identified herself as a Potrero Hill public‑housing resident, said residents have “waited almost four years” and want rebuilding to begin soon. Other commenters praised Bridge Housing and the city’s outreach while asking for firmer guarantees about the relocation plan and job opportunities for residents.
Commissioner Johnson moved to continue certification to Dec. 10 so that project actions would be considered closer in time to avoid legal timing gaps that can complicate appeals under CEQA. Deputy City Attorney Susan Cleveland Knowles and Eugene Flannery of the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) explained that the federal EIS and HUD’s request‑for‑release‑of‑funds process can proceed separately; MOHCD said it intends to submit the federal request after the federal comment period ends and that federal funds would not be endangered by a local continuance so long as the city eventually certifies the EIR.
Commission debate focused on the relocation plan for residents, coordination with neighboring projects and the legal risk of certifying the EIR before later project approvals are ready for commission review. Commissioners agreed the documentation and outreach have been substantial but that additional alignment and detail would reduce legal exposure. The motion to continue the certification to Dec. 10 passed unanimously.
Next steps: staff and the project sponsor will continue work to bring project approvals forward and will return to the commission on Dec. 10 for further action on certification and associated land‑use approvals.
