Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Large Project Authorization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals upholds planning commission on 570 Market Street downtown authorization
Summary
The board denied appeals from owners of adjacent properties who argued the 29‑story hotel at 570 Market would harm historic neighbors and overload Sutter Street curb uses. The board found no abuse of discretion and voted 3–0 to uphold the planning commission’s DNX approval (MND previously upheld by Board of Supervisors).
The Board of Appeals on Dec. 17 denied two appeals challenging the planning commission’s downtown project authorization for 570 Market Street, a proposed 29‑story hotel that would replace an existing two‑story commercial building.
Appellants included CPH 564 LP (owner of the historic Chancery Building at 564 Market) and 44 Montgomery Property LLC. Counsel for the Chancery Building argued the DNX improperly granted exceptions for freight and tour‑bus loading, would block about one‑third of a light well relied on by operable windows in the historic structure, and that construction vibration and noise analyses underestimated risks to the building’s older foundations. The Chancery’s consultant recommended real‑time vibration monitoring and stricter mitigation.
Counsel for 44 Montgomery argued the planning commission and zoning administrator failed to analyze real‑world curb and loading conditions on Sutter Street, which appellants said already carries heavy freight, taxi and tour‑bus activity; they also disputed the planning department’s choice of Market Street as the project’s primary frontage for setback calculations.
Project counsel and Planning Department staff told the board the planning commission conducted multi‑hearing review, approved a Final Mitigated Negative Declaration that had been subsequently upheld by the Board of Supervisors, and considered loading, pedestrian and design tradeoffs. Planning staff and project counsel said the site lacks on‑site loading or parking; the commission relied on nearby curbspace, Market Street frontages and design mitigations, and concluded exceptions and conditions were supportable for a narrow downtown lot under planning code §309/§210.2.
Commissioners pressed operational questions—trash, laundry, loading and how guests and ride‑shares will use the site—and acknowledged the project’s strong hotel market location. Applying the legal standard that an appeal can only succeed if the planning commission erred in interpretation or abused its discretion, Vice President Jose Lopez moved to deny the appeals and adopt the planning commission’s findings. The board voted 3–0 to deny the appeals, upholding the DNX and the planning commission motion.
