potrero view

1250 Missouri Street. Photo by Keith Goldstein.

June 2008

Missouri Street Development Under Scrutiny for Possible Zoning Violations

By Kerry Fleisher

The ongoing construction of a 53,000 square foot building at 1250 Missouri Street has sparked controversy amongst nearby business owners, who believe that the building violates zoning regulations.  The street is located within the Islais Creek Industrial Protection Zone, in which residential development isn’t allowed.  However, the installation of fireplaces, mezzanine bathrooms, and extensive kitchen plumbing in the four-story building – which were not in the original floor plans authorized by the San Francisco Planning Department in 2001 – has prompted neighbors to question whether the developer is attempting to illegally transform the light industrial building into 32 units of residential housing.

Seven years ago the Planning Department awarded project sponsor Maureen Shanahan a permit to construct retail space for bulky merchandise at the parcel.   Neighbors filed two stop-work orders earlier this year to halt the installment of fireplaces and mezzanine bathrooms in the building.  Both filings resulted in investigations by the Department of Building Inspection, which has closed both cases, stating on their permit tracking website that “everything is built according to approved plans.”

Since the original plans were approved they have undergone eight revisions, only six of which were approved by the Planning Department.  The last two revisions, made in November 2005 and March 2006, were approved by the Department of Building Inspection and never routed to the Planning Department.  The latter of the two revisions, which was packaged in an application for a Commercial Condominium Conversion and Lot Merger, includes the industrial fireplaces, extensive kitchen piping and mezzanine bathrooms.
Business owners in the light industrial corridor near Missouri Street are concerned that residential housing, if green-lighted by the City, could destroy the area’s businesses practices.  “If residential units are occupied on this small block, it will absolutely have an adverse effect on all of our businesses,” said Keith Goldstein, owner of Everest Waterproofing & Restoration, which is located near the development.  The 1250 Missouri Street parcel is close by a number of machine, construction, and production drop-off points, which require a steady stream of incoming and outgoing trucks and forklifts.  These activities could be undermined if residential units are built nearby, according to Goldstein.
 Sue Hester, an attorney with Reuben & Alter, is intervening to stop the project.  She originally filed for discretionary review at the Missouri Street site in 2000, arguing that the developer’s blueprints were not conducive to light industrial zoning.  As a result of the review, the Planning Department required that the developer widen corridors, install double doors, remove kitchen and mezzanine bathrooms, and accommodate bulky commercial merchandise.

The project sponsor had originally applied for two permits in 1998 – one to erect 16 live-work lofts, and the other to build office space – that were both denied by the Planning Department.  Their final – and ultimately approved – application stated that the goal was to erect “retail space for bulky merchandise such as furniture.”  The three applications contained similar subdivisions and floor plans, which raised Hester’s suspicions that the developers had ulterior motives to transform the lot into residential use at a future date.
The 2001 plans for 1250 Missouri allowed for “rough-ins;” the installation of behind-the-walls pipes, electrical boxes and wire necessary for any future expansions.  The plan specifically called for a “rough-in for future coffee bar” and “rough-in for future kitchen,” which would allow for basic plumbing and gas lines that could be transformed – after the project is finished – into an industrial kitchen.  The current floor plans by Michael Leavitt Architects, however, have shifted the placement of the gas pipes to more closely resemble a typical live-work kitchen set-up.  In a recent letter to concerned residents and business owners, Zoning Administrator Lawrence Badiner indicated that the Planning Department has required the project sponsor to resubmit blueprints that exclude kitchens, but include “rough-ins” for kitchens.

The 2001 plans didn’t provide for centralized heating, though industrial fireplaces have already been installed.  Whether industrial fireplaces are acceptable forms of heating for light-industrial use will be determined by the Planning Department in upcoming meetings.  In his letter, Badiner wrote that the fireplaces “have already been installed and will therefore be included in the revisions.”  In response, Potrero Booster Neighborhood Associate president Tony Kelly wrote, “Forcing the neighborhood to fight something that was not approved, but was installed illegally on these terms, is really unfair.”
The project comes under scrutiny at a time when Potrero Hill and Dogpatch activists are determined to enforce new zoning regulations that will emerge from the recently issued Eastern Neighborhood Area Draft Plans, which was produced after an almost decade-long community involvement process.  

Hester noted that if the lot were to be developed into residential housing it would be required to meet a number of legal requirements, such as an Environmental Impact Review, and pay corresponding City housing fees.  At the time the View went to print, the Planning Department had scheduled a Planning Commission hearing on May 29th to address concerns surrounding the Missouri Street parcel.

Subscribe to The Potrero View

All rights reserved. Copyright © 2006 The Potrero View.

Content on this site may not be archived, retransmitted, saved in a database, or used for any commercial purpose without the express written permission of The Potrero View or its Publishers.