Commission hears extensive public objections to SFMOMA expansion and America's Cup draft EIRs; residents, clubs and parks groups call for more mitigation

The San Francisco Planning Commission held public hearings on draft environmental impact reports Aug. 11, 2011 for two major projects — the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art expansion (including demolition of some buildings, relocation of Fire Station No.1 and a small housing component) and a large waterfront program tied to the 34th America’s Cup and a proposed cruise terminal.

Staff presentation and scope Planning staff summarized the SFMOMA expansion project (Case Nos. 2009.0291E and 2010.0275E). Michael Jacinto said the draft EIR described demolition at 670 and 676 Howard Street and an approximately 200-foot, roughly 230,000-square-foot museum addition; demolition of a building at 935 Folsom, relocation of Fire Station No.1 to that site, and construction of 13 housing units on the Shipley frontage. The draft EIR found demolition of 935 Folsom to be a significant and unavoidable impact and concluded that certain structures are eligible for the California Register of Historic Places. Staff noted the draft EIR was published July 11 and the public-review period runs through Aug. 25, 2011.

SFMOMA public comment: traffic, noise and views Public commenters urged additional analysis and mitigation. Foster Weeks (Clementina Cares) asked for renewed study of traffic and noise associated with the relocated fire station and suggested re‑examining the lack of a traffic signal at Folsom/Shipley. Liz Bridges, speaking for the W Hotel ownership (KSSF Enterprises), said the draft EIR is deficient on construction‑period traffic impacts (two years) and on visual impacts to hotel rooms — she said 40,000–50,000 visitors annually use the hotel and “at least 112 of the W’s rooms will be blocked” under the current project description, and she urged further analysis and mitigation. Nancy Connell Henson (249 Shipley St. HOA) strongly supported the relocation but asked for more aggressive traffic control, investigation of an equipment-testing room to reduce daily noise, and clearer interim uses and future housing plans for the Shipley parcel.

Commissioners asked staff to ensure that the comments-and-responses document addresses traffic mitigation, visual analyses, noise/test-room options and historic-evaluation questions. No approval action was requested or taken on the SFMOMA project at the hearing.

America’s Cup / cruise terminal DEIR: breadth of public opposition Planning staff then opened a public hearing for the America’s Cup and James R. Herman Cruise Terminal draft EIR (Case No. 2010.0493E), which staff said identifies potentially significant unavoidable impacts in land use, transportation, noise and air quality. The hearing drew a large public turnout and extended testimony from swimmers’ clubs, park agencies, environmental organizations and business groups.

A recurring theme was the draft EIR’s treatment of Aquatic Park and other recreational uses. Speakers from the Dolphin Club and South End Rowing Club, including long‑time members, said the DEIR largely omits the day‑to‑day recreational use of Aquatic Park, warned that proposed on‑water installations (large barged LED screens and increased boat traffic) would displace swimmers and small craft, and called for clear plans to keep clubs and swimmers safe and accessible during race and non‑race periods. Jan Blum said the EIR “fails to recognize or mitigate negative impacts on nearby neighborhoods” and warned of continuous noise and vibration; several swimmers and club leaders detailed safety concerns about increased powerboats, propellers and cable connections for floating screens.

Environmental and park protection groups (San Francisco Baykeeper, Golden Gate National Parks Conservancy and others) said the DEIR defers too many mitigation measures to later plans (the “people plan,” waste and sustainability plans) and urged binding, specific mitigation and funding for park repairs and operations. Several speakers raised alarm about a temporary shutdown of shore‑side power for cruise ships during event-related construction and asked that shore power be preserved or replaced to avoid increased diesel pollution.

Businesses and neighborhood stakeholders urged more transportation specificity. Jane Conners, senior property manager at the Ferry Building, warned that northbound Embarcadero closures on race days would cut off merchant deliveries and the farmers market and that the DEIR defers too much to a later people plan. Fisherman’s Wharf representatives supported some transit investments in the DEIR (an E Line and additional F Line support) but asked for firm plans to protect access and loading.

Commissioners’ response and process notes Commissioners universally acknowledged the volume and specificity of public comment. Several commissioners said the DEIR appears incomplete in places and asked staff to incorporate public input in the final EIR’s comments-and-responses. Commissioner Miguel highlighted forthcoming NEPA scoping hearings (hosted by federal agencies) for federal lands and encouraged speakers to participate. Staff reminded the public that written comments will be accepted by the Planning Department through Aug. 25, 2011; no approvals were requested at the hearing.

What happens next Staff will compile the public testimony and written comments into a comments-and-responses document and revise the draft EIR as appropriate. Commission members requested outlines of all reviewing and approving bodies for the multi‑agency projects and asked staff to provide related implementation plans when they are available. Written comments on both DEIRs are due to the Planning Department by close of business on Aug. 25, 2011.

Selected quotes: "The draft EIR is deficient in analyzing construction‑period traffic and the impacts related to height, massing, and design of the MoMA expansion," said Liz Bridges, representing the W Hotel owners. "Aquatic Park is being turned into a kind of a carnival for several summers," said Joe Rillick, a longtime resident and swimmer, summarizing many public speakers’ concerns about displacement of everyday recreational uses.

The hearings made clear that local recreational clubs, conservation groups, nearby businesses and neighborhood organizations expect the final EIR to include stronger, specific mitigation measures and funding commitments before either project advances to later approvals.