DZLU MEETING DATE: Jan. 21, 2025
1. ONGOING POLICY UPDATES
a. Rezoning Status
No news to report as there has not yet been an update from SF Planning.
b. Objective Design Standards—Preservation Standards Draft
https://citypln-m-extnl.sfgov.org/Commissions/CPC/1_9_2025/Commission%20Packet/2024-008053CRV.pdf
The State has mandated that only objective standards be applied when reviewing housing proposals, rather than discretionary or subjective criteria. In June, we highlighted the development of general objective design standards to replace the longstanding and subjective Residential Design Guidelines. Additional standards have now been developed to apply specifically to historic properties. Among the broad subject areas covered in these new standards are existing character-defining features, architectural features and site design such as massing.
These standards were unanimously endorsed by the SF Historic Preservation Commission on November 14, 2024 and will now be considered by the Planning Commission on February 13. They would apply to additions and modifications to existing residential historic buildings of 2 units or more designated as “Category A” (i.e. a historic resource) buildings.
An illustrative excerpt on massing for additions follows.
c. North Beach National Register Historic District proposal
Two years ago, the Northeast San Francisco Conservancy had completed a North Beach Historic Context Statement and Survey that was endorsed by SF Planning and supported by RHN. It had included blocks between Mason and Taylor Streets within RHN’s boundaries. The Conservancy is now building on this effort and proposing a National Register Historic District. In the current map, no areas fall within RHN’s boundaries. To be included in the National Register, the proposal must be approved by the California State Historic Resources Commission after review by SF’s Historic Preservation Commission.
At the hearing before the SF Historic Preservation Commission on 1/15 the sponsor and supporters highlighted the benefits of a District which include potential access to federal and state tax benefits for remodels and preservation work, enhancement of property values, community prestige and increased tourism. It was maintained that no additional impediments to property modifications or development would be created by this designation, which would be largely ceremonial.
Some raised concerns about the extent of outreach to neighbors, the scale of the proposed district, and potential impacts to properties that may be newly classified as contributors to the district. Questions were also raised about the implications for projects such as 659 Union and the adjacent garage on Powell St. (the site of the fire at the corner of Union and Columbus) and other sites for housing whose feasibility may depend on utilizing State bonus and streamlining programs. Clarification was sought as to whether application of these State programs could be limited if a parcel is included in the District. These issues were also echoed at a community meeting organized by North Beach Neighbors on 1/22. Because of these questions, Supervisor Sauter and the president of NBN requested a pause in the process to allow for greater outreach, and clarification of any impacts. NBN will seek a 6-month continuance on any decisions on this matter at the upcoming State Historic Resources Commission hearing on 2/7.
DZLU is observing this process and learning from it as RHN explores additional preservation initiatives on Russian Hill.
************************************************************************
DZLU IS RECRUITING!
We welcome anyone with an interest in planning and zoning issues to consider joining our active and fun committee. Please contact zoning@rhnsf.org
Leave a Reply