Board of Appeals upholds Beach Chalet coastal permit after hours of public comment

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Aug. 1, 2012, denied two appeals of the Recreation and Park Department’s Beach Chalet athletic‑field renovation and upheld the department’s coastal zone permit by a 4–0 vote.

Appellants argued the project — which would replace worn natural turf with synthetic turf, add spectator seating and install 60‑foot field lights — conflicts with the Western Shoreline area plan and the California Coastal Act. Brooke O’Hanley, counsel for San Francisco Ocean Edge, Golden Gate Audubon and the Sierra Club, told the board the proposal would remove meadow and trees and “broadcast a 150,000 watts of light 365 days a year” that would degrade dark‑sky resources and habitat. She asked the board to accept additional evidence for a hybrid alternative that would preserve Beach Chalet as grass and place turf at West Sunset instead.

Recreation and Park officials defended the project as a response to a documented shortfall of playfields and to longstanding safety and maintenance issues at Beach Chalet. Phil Ginsberg, general manager of the Recreation and Park Department, said the project is part of the City Fields partnership to increase youth playing hours and argued the planned renovation would raise annual playing time at Beach Chalet from about 4,738 hours to more than 14,000. Dawn Kamalanavin, the department’s capital and planning director, described measures in the environmental impact report and design changes — including shortened and relocated light standards and shielding — intended to limit off‑site lighting impacts.

Planning Department staff told the board the certified environmental impact report and related findings were reviewed and that the local coastal plan’s policies must be read on balance. Sarah Jones, a Planning Department analyst, explained that alternatives had been considered in the EIR, including an off‑site alternative at West Sunset, and that the Board of Supervisors had previously upheld the EIR certification.

Hundreds of members of the public spoke over several hours. Opponents highlighted habitat and dark‑sky concerns, questions about the EIR’s treatment of hazardous materials and alleged inadequate analysis of a hybrid alternative. Supporters — including youth‑sports coaches, school district athletics staff and parents — emphasized field safety, water savings and the city’s shortage of playfields. Don Collins, San Francisco Unified School District athletics commissioner, said improved fields would have “athletic, academic and economic” benefits for city students.

After rebuttals and staff answers to commissioner questions, the board read draft factual findings into the record, concluded there had been no new information to change the certified EIR conclusions, and voted to deny the appeals and uphold the permit. The board’s action begins the 10‑day rehearing request period.