Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Major Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs Potrero Power Station redevelopment package, seeks attachments to file
Summary
The Land Use Committee recommended three Potrero Power Station items to the full Board with positive committee reports after presentations on remediation, public benefits and affordability (30% BMR), transportation and workforce commitments; technical amendments and exhibits will be incorporated into the record before the Board vote.
The Land Use Committee on April 13 voted to forward three planning items for the Potrero Power Station mixed‑use redevelopment — General Plan and plan-element updates, a Special Use District (SUD), and a development agreement — to the full Board with positive committee recommendations.
Sponsor Supervisor Shamann Walton described the project as a transformational reuse of the decommissioned power plant site that would deliver jobs, economic development, and a substantial affordable‑housing component. John Lau of the Office of Economic and Workforce Development presented the Southern Bayfront framework and summarized the project’s public benefits, including an overall 30% below‑market‑rate (BMR) housing commitment on full buildout (about 780 BMR units), a requirement that no less than two‑thirds of those affordable units be provided on‑site in initial phases, and neighborhood‑preference rules for on‑site units.
Staff noted the project remains subject to hazardous‑materials remediation and the Regional Water Quality Control Board’s oversight before full development can proceed. The package includes substantial transportation fees (staff cited about $65 million in TSF fees), a fee amount tied to on‑site/in‑lieu requirements (staff cited approximately $45 million tied to the housing plan), and a negotiated $1 million workforce development contribution.
Labor and housing advocates called in during public comment to support the project, and planning staff said prior commissions had issued unanimous positive recommendations. Committee members asked for and were promised more detailed housing‑plan exhibits breaking down the AMI tiers underlying the 72% AMI average the staff cited; staff said the housing plan and finance plan exhibits would be provided and incorporated into the file before the Board hearing.
The committee approved a technical amendment to the SUD ordinance and voted to forward items 3–5 with positive recommendations, recording three ayes. The full Board will consider the ordinances and the development agreement at its next meeting, with the clarified exhibits available in the record.
