Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee adopts amendments on Sacred Heart landmarking; votes to continue for posting
Summary
The committee voted to amend a proposed landmark ordinance for the Sacred Heart Parish Complex — clarifying protections for exterior and select interior features, adding the wooden connector bridge and replacement‑in‑kind procedures — and continued the item one week to March 4 to post substantive amendments.
The Land Use & Transportation Committee on Feb. 26 considered an ordinance to designate the Sacred Heart Parish Complex as a San Francisco landmark and unanimously approved substantive amendments before continuing the item for one week so the public can review the changes.
Planning Department staff explained that the Historic Preservation Commission had earlier recommended landmark designation, citing the complex’s Romanesque Revival architecture, association with Father Eugene Boyle and significance to local history. Planning staff noted multiple owners and a complex multi‑building nomination that required an extended review period.
Vice Chair Dean Preston circulated four substantive amendments that add findings about exterior and interior features (including stained glass and the bell), clarify the process and standards for “replacement in kind,” and explicitly include the wooden connector bridge as a character‑defining exterior feature. Preservationists and parishioners at public comment urged that interior frescoes, the choir loft and other elements be protected and asked the Board to require city approval before any replacement in kind.
Planning staff and owner representatives discussed safety and restoration challenges for some interior elements. After debate, the committee voted to amend the ordinance as presented and to continue the item to March 4, 2024, to allow a week for the amended language to be posted and reviewed by stakeholders.
Vice Chair Preston stated the amendments were substantive, so they will be posted and reviewed; the committee recorded three ayes on the motion to amend and again on the motion to continue the item.
The continuation is intended to ensure public access to the amended text and to allow affected stakeholders time to comment further at the subsequent hearing.
