Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Environment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies environmental appeal of 3601 Lawton HomeSF project, upholds Planning Commission authorization
Summary
The Board of Appeals unanimously denied an appeal that challenged a HOME‑SF authorization for 3601 Lawton Street, finding no error or abuse of discretion and noting that environmental remediation and Department of Public Health oversight are required at the permitting stage.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Sept. 30 denied an environmental appeal of the Planning Commission’s HOME‑SF authorization for 3601 Lawton Street and upheld the Commission’s decision by a 5–0 vote.
Appellant Mike Murphy told the board the site, a former gas station, has a history of underground‑storage‑tank releases and contaminated groundwater; he argued the Planning Department’s common‑sense CEQA exemption (issued July 8) was inappropriate given the site’s contaminated soil and groundwater and urged that remediation plans and controls be required before authorization. Murphy said product leaked from an underground tank and created a deep groundwater plume and cautioned that excavation could release benzene‑laden dust and vapors.
Project representatives and Planning staff responded that the project site is enrolled in the Mahler (hazardous‑materials) program, that the Planning Department issued a common‑sense exemption rather than a categorical exemption, and that the project sponsor has begun phase‑2 environmental investigation work in coordination with the Department of Public Health (DPH). The sponsor said it had engaged consultants, expected DPH oversight, and planned soil excavation and vapor‑mitigation measures as required by state and local rules.
Planning Deputy Zoning Administrator Scott Sanchez explained that remediations on Mahler sites are addressed during the building‑permit process, that DPH is the lead agency for abatement and will set removal/monitoring requirements, and that final occupancy requires DPH sign‑off. Sanchez also said a CEQA challenge to the environmental determination would have had to be filed to the Board of Supervisors within 30 days and that no timely CEQA appeal was filed.
After discussion, Commissioner Rick Swig moved to deny the appeal, finding no error or abuse of discretion by the Planning Commission; the motion passed 5–0. The board’s decision leaves the HOME‑SF authorization in place and confirms that environmental remediation and regulatory oversight remain part of the permit and construction process.
Next steps: the sponsor proceeds with required phase‑2 investigations and any DPH‑mandated remediation; building permits will be routed to DPH and DBI for review, and final occupancy will require DPH sign‑off on remediation work.
