Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission reviews Martin Building revision to 2235 Third Street, seeks neighborhood input
Summary
Martin Building Company told the Planning Commission it is increasing units at 2235 Third Street from 179 to 196 to access HUD financing and Proposition 1C funds, adding childcare and pursuing LEED Gold. Neighbors asked for more outreach; a commissioner recused after disclosing ties to the sponsor.
Patrick McNerney of Martin Building Company told the San Francisco Planning Commission on Sept. 3 that the developer is seeking an administrative finding of general conformity for revisions to the approved 2235 Third Street project, including an increase in unit count from 179 to 196 and minor façade changes.
The sponsor said the 9.5% increase in units was driven primarily by access to FHA/HUD financing limits and by a Proposition 1C infill grant that closed the project’s funding gap. McNerney said the revised plan will provide 20% of units at 30 percent of area median income (AMI), include an on-site childcare facility and voluntarily pursue LEED Gold certification and a full rooftop solar installation. He also said the project will be rental, use prevailing wage construction, and incorporate car-share and electric vehicle charging.
McNerney explained that HUD rules influenced the project’s parking and soil remediation approach. He said HUD will not allow capping of lead-contaminated soil in financed projects, requiring excavation and removal; that constraint, together with Proposition 1C brownfield funds, led the sponsor to replace single-level parking with two levels (one at grade and one below grade). The sponsor said a $2,000,000 Proposition 1C award for brownfield cleanup is helping cover the increased costs and that an awarded bond allocation expires Oct. 22, creating urgency to obtain plan check release from DBI.
Neighborhood speakers including preschool operators and the Dogpatch Neighborhood Association supported the project’s childcare and affordability but urged better community outreach on the unit increase and raised concerns about last-minute changes. Planning staff said this item exceeded the zoning administrator’s threshold for administrative approval and was presented for the commission’s input; the director said a letter documenting general-conformity would be issued after the meeting.
During public comment a commissioner disclosed having performed paid work for Martin Building Company and moved to recuse himself from matters involving the sponsor; the commission approved the recusal. No final entitlement action was taken at the hearing; staff will issue the conformity letter and the sponsor expects to return on related items such as the on-site childcare program.
The Planning Commission’s packet includes Motion Number 17,680, which contains the original findings; staff said the proposed changes preserve the project’s massing in the Third Street elevation while meeting the 40 percent two-bedroom requirement and upgrading unit mix to better serve families.
