Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Large Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission continues 490 South Van Ness large‑project hearing after hours of public testimony
Summary
After more than four hours of public testimony split between opponents citing displacement and affordability and supporters citing Eastern Neighborhoods compliance and new housing, the Commission continued the large‑project authorization for 490 South Van Ness to Oct. 2, 2014 by a 6–1 vote.
The Commission on Sept. 4 continued consideration of a contentious large‑project authorization for a 7‑story, 72‑unit mixed‑use building at 490 South Van Ness, giving staff and the sponsor more time to refine design details after extensive public comment.
The project sponsor presented a tier‑2 code‑compliant proposal under the Eastern Neighborhoods plan that includes 72 dwelling units, on‑site mandatory inclusionary housing (16% BMR onsite), retail and 48 off‑street parking spaces. Planning staff recommended approval with conditions and noted the project would pay significant impact and school fees.
Opponents—organized as the Plaza 16 coalition and represented by tenants, community groups and the Redstone Labor Temple—urged a moratorium on further market‑rate development in the Mission, arguing the BMR mix (90% AMI) is insufficient, that the project will accelerate displacement of long‑term residents and small businesses, and that outreach to adjacent Redstone tenants and Marshall School families was inadequate. Parents of Marshall Elementary asked that the garage entrance not be placed where it would funnel traffic by the school. Supporters (including housing advocates, developers and the PTA president’s letter) said the project follows the adopted Eastern Neighborhoods plan, provides affordable units, cleans up a blighted lot and creates jobs.
Commissioners debated tradeoffs among design, parking and neighborhood impacts and asked staff and the sponsor to revisit materials, alley treatment, and the garage location (with MTA input). Commissioner Richards moved for a continuance to allow the revised drawings to be reviewed; the Commission continued the matter to Oct. 2, 2014 by a 6–1 vote (Commissioner Fong opposed).
Why it mattered: The hearing crystallized core citywide tensions over how to add housing while limiting displacement and preserving neighborhood character. Multiple neighborhood groups testified at length, and the Commission asked staff to mediate design refinements before the next hearing.
What’s next: The item will return Oct. 2, 2014 with revised drawings and additional staff review; the Commission asked staff to check garage siting with the Municipal Transportation Agency and to include revised materials in the packet one week prior to the continued date.
