Planning commission certifies EIR for Candlestick Point–Hunters Point Phase 2 after heated public comment

The San Francisco Planning Commission and the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency held a joint special meeting on June 3 to consider certification of the final environmental impact report (EIR) for the Candlestick Point–Hunters Point Shipyard Phase 2 redevelopment project and related plan and financing actions.

After more than 10 hours of presentations and public testimony, and further late‑evening deliberations, the Planning Commission voted to certify the final EIR, with a 4–3 vote (Commissioners Miguel, Antonini, Borden and Lee in favor; Commissioners Moore, Seguaya and Olague opposed). The Redevelopment Agency then adopted the package of redevelopment resolutions and the disposition and development agreement implementing the project documents by unanimous votes in that body.

What the commissions decided

The Planning Commission certified the EIR as complete and in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Planning staff and agency environmental staff presented the Final EIR and the comments-and-responses (CNR) record, which staff said responded to written and oral comments received during the draft EIR review. Redevelopment staff described companion actions before the Agency: amendments to the Bayview Hunters Point and Hunters Point Shipyard redevelopment plans, adoption of design‑for‑development documents, and authorization of a disposition and development agreement (DDA) with CP Development Company (a Lennar-led joint venture) to implement the plan. Redevelopment staff and the mayor’s office said the project will use private capital plus redevelopment tax‑increment and Mello‑Roos financing for horizontal infrastructure, parks and other public benefits.

Why people testified

Public testimony stretched across dozens of speakers and covered a wide range of concerns and endorsements. Some community members and environmental scientists repeatedly urged rejection or delay of EIR certification, citing the shipyard’s Superfund history and long‑running contamination at several parcels. Speakers who opposed certification raised specific concerns about early transfer, institutional controls vs. full remediation, the potential for radiaoactive or toxic constituents to pose long‑term health risks, and whether the CNR had adequately addressed key comments.

“I cannot accept a 150,000 tons of greenhouse gases where families live,” Alicia Garza of People Organized to Win Employment Rights said in testimony urging more protection and cleanup before approval.

Other residents, labor leaders, and business groups urged approval, saying the project will deliver long‑overdue jobs, affordable housing, parks and services for a neglected part of the city. Speakers who supported the project cited $700 million already spent on cleanup and multiple layers of federal, state and local oversight of the Navy cleanup process. Labor leaders and unions emphasized locally targeted hiring and the community benefits package negotiated with the developer as reasons to move forward.

“The project will provide tens of thousands of homes and jobs for this region,” Matt Regan of the Bay Area Council said in support of the EIR, and labor officials described commitments to workforce training and targeted hiring.

Key project elements and legal authorities

- Project area: roughly 700 acres in Southeast San Francisco covering Candlestick Point and Phase 2 of the Hunters Point Shipyard. - Major actions approved or advanced: certification of the Final EIR; amendments to the Bayview Hunters Point and Hunters Point Shipyard redevelopment plans; adoption of design‑for‑development documents for Candlestick Point and Hunters Point Phase 2; authorization of a DDA between the Agency and CP Development Company; park reconfiguration and public‑trust exchange discussions with State Parks and the State Lands Commission; findings required under the California Redevelopment Law to deploy tax‑increment financing for public improvements. - Legal/administrative authorities referenced in the hearing included the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Proposition G (2008, city policy), the 2004 conveyance agreement with the U.S. Navy governing phased cleanup and transfer, and state and federal oversight (EPA, DTSC, regional water boards). Planning staff repeatedly noted that certification of the EIR is a determination that the environmental document is complete; project approvals and implementation are separate subsequent steps.

Votes at a glance

- Planning Commission — certification of the Final EIR: passed 4–3 (yes: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Lee; no: Moore, Seguaya, Olague). (Vote recorded on the joint hearing record at the meeting.) - Redevelopment Agency — adoption of the set of redevelopment resolutions, DDA and related financing and land‑transfer actions: passed by the Agency (roll calls recorded in the public record; most agency items were approved unanimously on the night’s calendar).

Discussion highlights and staff commitments

Staff, the mayor’s office and agency leaders emphasized the long, iterative public process for this project (decades of study and many hundreds of meetings), and that substantial portions of the Navy cleanup are already complete. Redevelopment and city staff committed to continuing to work with community advisory bodies — the CAC and PAC — and with regulatory agencies, and to keep design and implementation under ongoing interagency review. Planning staff noted a set of alternatives examined in the EIR (including a non‑stadium variant and a historic‑preservation subalternative) and preserved those alternatives on the CEQA record; the certified document identified certain impacts that could remain significant unless addressed by later design and mitigation.

What’s next

Certification of the Final EIR allows the city and agency to proceed to the next, discrete approvals and implementation steps: adoption of plan and zoning amendments, final DDA execution, detailed design review of public realm and building phases, and eventual permitting and construction in phased subprojects. The Navy’s cleanup schedule and any federal supplemental EIS for base reuse will remain important parallel processes; staff said the Navy’s documents and oversight will continue to govern remediation decisions.

The hearing record shows substantial disagreement among residents and interest groups over timing and sufficiency of cleanup, the risk of long‑term exposure, and the balance between environmental protection and the economic benefits of redevelopment. Commissioners who voted against certification said the EIR still leaves unresolved issues they could not accept. Commissioners who voted in favor said the document meets CEQA standards and provides the framework for detailed, enforceable public benefits if implemented closely with community oversight.

The joint hearing record and the CNR are entered into the public file; planning and agency staff said they will continue to publish implementation details and to consult community advisory committees as project phases roll forward.