Planning commission certifies final EIR and approves entitlements for 350 Mission Street, 6-1

The San Francisco Planning Commission on Feb. 16 certified the final environmental impact report for the proposed 350 Mission Street project and approved the package of entitlements needed for the project to proceed, voting 6 to 1 on the CEQA certification and subsequently approving allocation and variance requests.

Brent Bollinger of the planning department's environmental analysis section told commissioners that the final EIR finds the project would generate project-specific significant and unavoidable impacts (notably transportation and construction air-quality effects) and that the commission would need to adopt a statement of overriding considerations under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) should it choose to approve the project. Bollinger also read into the record a non-substantive checklist error in the EIR appendix and said the error does not change the report's conclusions.

Kevin Guy of planning staff summarized the entitlements before the commission: certification of the final EIR (case 2006.1524E), allocation of the requested office square footage under the annual office development limitation program, determinations of planning-code compliance, and a variance for the width of the shared parking/loading entry on Fremont Street. Guy noted a reduction in retail area from about 6,500 square feet analyzed in the draft EIR to roughly 1,000 square feet in the current proposal and recommended approval with conditions to allow limited administrative adjustments.

David Wall, president of JLL Development and Management and a project sponsor, said the project is intended to be transit-oriented and highly visible from the Transbay terminal. Craig Hartman, partner in charge of architecture for Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, described a design that lifts a pedestrian-oriented public interior space above the ground plane, incorporates LEED Platinum strategies (daylighting, low-energy ventilation, geothermal radiant systems and recycled-content concrete), and includes an LED art wall curated with the California College of the Arts.

Adjacent property owners raised concerns during public comment. Tom Hart, representing the owners of 45 Fremont Street, said he received late noticing and asked for a continuance so neighbors could meet the developer and study the plans; he objected specifically to bulk exceptions and building-separation reductions that he said would intrude on an existing public open space plaza. Alex DeGood, representing 50 Beale Street, likewise said notices arrived late or incorrectly and asked that the commission delay action to allow neighbor outreach and to test whether a code-conforming building could achieve similar goals without the requested exceptions.

Commissioners expressed broad support for the project's ground-floor activation and the mezzanine-style public space, but several asked the sponsor to continue outreach to adjacent owners and pressed staff and the sponsor on technical issues: whether the project falls within the Bay Area air-district's high-volume roadway threshold, the adequacy of transportation mitigation that depends on outside agencies, the width of the combined curb cut (staff noted code allows either a 27-foot shared opening or separate portals aggregating to similar widths), and the project's parking program (Commissioner Miguel flagged only three EV-ready stalls out of 61 as insufficient).

On the motions, the commission first split the CEQA item for separate consideration and then certified the final EIR by roll-call vote, 6 to 1. The record notes Commissioner Seguaia voted against certification. The commission then approved the allocation of office square footage and the planning-code compliance determinations by recorded votes, and granted the requested variance for the curb/loading entry with standard conditions. Staff advised that the variance decision letter will be issued and carries a 10-day appeal window to the Board of Appeals.

Next steps for the project include completion of any required variance decision letter and the expiration of appeal windows; staff and the sponsor indicated they will continue direct outreach to neighboring property owners as part of post-approval coordination.

Quote: "We believe it is suitable for the existing urban context," Kevin Guy, planning staff, said, summarizing staff support for the requested entitlements.

Ending: The commission recorded votes for entitlements and variances and moved on to the next agenda items; interested parties were told to provide names to the commission secretary to receive variance decision letters once issued.