Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board pauses 1050 Valencia decision, seeks legal briefing after large public outcry to protect the Marsh Theatre
Summary
After extensive public comment urging protections for the Marsh Theatre and dispute over whether the Housing Accountability Act applies, the Board of Appeals continued decisions on draft findings for 1050 Valencia Street to Feb. 26 and requested up to 10‑page briefs on Government Code §65589.5(j).
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Jan. 15 took testimony from neighbors, theater supporters and the project sponsor on the contested 1050 Valencia Street development and then continued the matter for legal briefing on the applicability of Government Code section 65589.5(j).
Mary Gallagher, representing the Marsh neighborhood, urged adoption of draft findings and conditions she said the developer had violated — including a required community liaison and construction hour limits. "The violation of this condition is sufficient grounds for you to deny the project in its entirety," Gallagher told the board. Opposing speakers and many neighborhood residents described conditions that would protect theater programming, including a construction stop at 4 p.m. for exterior work and disclosure requirements for prospective buyers and renters.
Project counsel Andrew Junius argued the board must ensure any reduction in density satisfies Government Code §65589.5(j), which requires certain public‑health or safety findings where a local agency reduces density of an approved housing project. The planning department said the project was code‑complying when approved, and Scott Sanchez told commissioners the project provides some affordability under prior rules.
After an extended public comment period with dozens of speakers, commissioners said the key legal question was whether §65589.5(j) applies. The board voted to continue the item to Feb. 26, 2014, and ordered simultaneous briefs (up to 10 pages, exhibits allowed) on that specific legal issue; briefs are due the Thursday prior to the hearing. The continuance passed 5‑0.
The continuation preserves the draft findings but delays any final vote on conditions such as the recommended removal of a top floor and related affordable‑housing thresholds.
