Mission Bay Fire Aftermath Height Limit ♦♦No Word Yet on March Fire’S Cause, Site’S Future

MONEY2014 MATTERS Page 14 114th Year OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO Volume 114, No. 4 April 2014 www.SFBuildingTradesCouncil.org Challenge to Mission Bay Fire Aftermath Height Limit ♦ No Word Yet on March Fire’s Cause, Site’s Future Measure Fails Photo by Paul Burton By Paul Burton ♦ Prop B Puts Proposed Contributing Writer Construction in Jeopardy emolition of the apartment lawsuit challenging building in Mis- the Waterfront Height sion Bay just A Limit ballot measure south of AT&T was denied by the San Fran- DPark was being completed as cisco Superior Court on March Organized Labor went to press, 18. The measure will appear on with still no word of when the the June 3 ballot as Proposition structure would be re-built or B and, if passed, would impose what caused the fire that de- tighter restrictions on water- stroyed the building on March front development by requiring 11. A five-alarm fire raged voter approval for projects that for several hours and stopped exceed existing height limits. construction of the project San Francisco Superior which was almost 80 percent Court Judge Marla Miller cited complete and set to open in case law that guides the court to August. The $227 million, 172- be cautious in pre-election chal- unit apartment building is one Work stopped at an apartment building project in Mission Bay after a five-alarm fire raged for several lenges to ballot initiatives. The of two being built by BRE and hours. The $227 million, 172-unit apartment building was one of two being built by BRE and contractor judge wrote that, “The threshold (continued on page 6) Suffolk Construction at 4th Street and China Basin. issue for this court is whether the Photo by Paul Burton validity of the proposed initiative should be reviewed before the Swinerton Starts Construction election, rather than allowing the electorate to vote on the initia- on 399 Fremont Street tive, which has already qualified winerton Builders has buildings on the site, including for the ballot.” She noted that begun work at 399 333 Fremont next door, were pre-election challenges are more Fremont. The project demolished in February 2008. appropriate when challeng- includes a 42-story, Swinerton recently completed a ing the validity of signatures S440-foot tower with 447 “ultra- new apartment building at 333 to qualify a measure, but that luxury” rental apartments Fremont. opponents of the measure could averaging 800 square feet each According to Swinerton, the still challenge Prop B after the and an eight-story podium with project is “designed to cel- election, if it passes. 251 parking stalls. The two ebrate the dynamic and urban The court’s ruling noted structures will total approxi- lifestyle of the city.” The design that, “Petitioners also contend mately 600,000 square feet. In features expansive glass provid- that the initiative is invalid un- Work has begun at 399 Fremont, which will include a 42-story, 2006, the project was approved ing panoramic views of the San (continued on page 24) 440-foot tower. for 452 dwelling units. All (continued on page 24) Hod Carriers 166 Inside Return to Council Carpenters 22 ..................page 7 Next Month in Organized Labor: he San Francisco Build- Bermack Photo by Richard Electrical Workers 6 ........page 8 ing and Construction On the Job Site Looking up the Hatch ......page 10 TTrades Council is wel- – Sign & Display coming back a union of highly Bricklayers 3 ....................page 11 Local 510 skilled laborers to our group, In the May issue of Heat & Frost 16 ................page 11 the Hod Carriers. Local 166, Organized Labor, we will Hammers & Leads ...........page 12 part of the Laborers out of feature a visit to a pair Cement Masons 300 ........page 12 Oakland, deploys their mem- of Sign & Display Local bers throughout the Bay Area. Sprinklers 483 ..................page 13 510 job sites. We’ll speak Hod carriers are an integral with workers preparing Carpet Layers 12 ..............page 19 part of the construction world. shows at Moscone South Sign Display 510 ..............page 20 They work primarily with and Moscone West. Glaziers 718 .....................page 21 bricklayers and plasterers, car- Don’t miss this insight rying the ‘hod’ on their shoul- Roofers 40 ........................page 21 into the world of Sign & der – a V-shaped instrument on Display. (continued on page 6) BUILDING THE TRADES The Sierra Club’s Threats to the Environment by Michael Theriault, Secretary-Treasurer San Francisco Building & Construction Trades Council n sponsoring Proposition B, the to the Port and City government only less authority to shape the project. The “Voter Approval for Waterfront through legal delegation from that result of the vote could be to override IDevelopment Height Increases” commission. The State Lands Com- environmental protections and miti- initiative on this June’s ballot, the San mission still retains authority over all gations normally available under the Francisco Bay chapter of the Sierra projects proposed on Port lands. The California Environmental Quality Act, Club has betrayed its mission and cre- Commission is one of several agencies or CEQA. ated new threats to the environment. with similar missions – for State Lands, A Planning Department analysis of Prop B would require that any to provide “stewardship of the lands, Prop B makes this very point: change in building height limits on Port waterways, and resources entrusted to “… placing some or all of the ele- of San Francisco land be approved by its care through economic development, ments of a development project on the voters. The Port has sought long-term protection, preservation, and restora- ballot for approval may not be subject leases to developers on some of its tion.” Some of these agencies operate to CEQA review depending on how the are key to protecting humanity itself lands to fund maintenance and repair in counties with electorates far more measure reaches the ballot. Subsequent- from climate change and its effects. of Port facilities. Present height limits conservative than in San Francisco. ly, should the voters approve any project The Sierra Club knows these things. on some are very low. On Seawall Lot If local voters take authority over elements that appear on the ballot - It declines to grapple, however, with 337, now Parking Lot A for the Giants’ matters ordinarily under the jurisdiction and depending on the language of the the tough decisions that must be made ballpark, they are effectively zero. The of such agencies, voters in conservative particular ballot measure - it is possible if San Francisco is to play its necessary Giants have plans to build eleven blocks counties might decide, say, to fill present that few, if any further discretionary ap- role. Some local Sierra Club staffers of housing and office there, with light tidelands for commercial development provals relating to those elements could have expressed a willingness to con- industry (including another Anchor and an improved tax base. By asserting be required by the City.” sider backing particular projects, if Steam brewery) on adjacent Pier 48. the authority of local voters over mat- But CEQA is an indispensible tool we ask. True environmental leadership Prop B does not address any issue ters under the jurisdiction of the State in environmental protections, one in this era, however, would not mean other than building height, and height Lands Commission, the Sierra Club both the California State Building and going thumbs up or down – and mostly is not itself an environmental issue. and Prop B set a precedent that can gut Construction Trades Council and the down – on individual projects. It would It might or might not be tied to other environmental protections. Sierra Club have defended vigorously mean being in the forefront of a push issues, such as traffic, shadow, and bird- They do so in another way, as well. at the Capitol. In effectively encour- to decide in what neighborhoods strikes, or more vaguely to “quality of If a developer does go to the voters, it aging developers to seek ballot votes and in what building types a growing life,” but Prop B ignores these complexi- will not be simply on the question of overriding CEQA and thereby setting population will live, and to make such ties entirely. Where they genuinely exist, heights. The developer will need voters a precedent replicable elsewhere in the decisions work economically for a full they can usually be addressed through to have a more complete understand- state, the Sierra Club undercuts its own range of income levels. careful design and mitigation. In focus- ing of a project than would come from statewide efforts and ours. But the local Sierra Club fails the en- ing instead on height the backers of just listing heights and so will undoubt- So long as populations grow, if we vironment also in this. It has concerned Prop B reveal their real concern: The edly seek their approval of a thorough are to protect the environment cities like itself instead with the views from the views from their own windows. formulation of it. If the developer has San Francisco – dense, walkable, well- windows (no doubt not birdproofed) of Jurisdiction over Port properties, all resorted to the initiative process to supplied with public transit, and more a privileged few. Far from defending the either former tidelands or obtained in reach the ballot, and if the voters ap- efficient in use of land, water, and energy environment, the Sierra Club through exchange for former tidelands, belongs prove a thoroughly formulated version – must accommodate a large share of Prop B has created threats to it in de- to the State Lands Commission, and of the project, City agencies will have that growth.

Load more