Historic Preservation Commission backs landmark recommendation for Sacred Heart Parish Complex

The San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission voted unanimously Sept. 20 to forward a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to designate the Sacred Heart Parish Complex as a landmark. Shannon Ferguson, planning department staff, told the commission the department believes the complex meets eligibility requirements and recommended two periods of significance: about 1891–1936 and 1968–1972, the latter tied to Father Eugene Boyle's tenure.

The department's report, prepared with consultant Elaine Brown Styles and funded by the Historic Preservation Fund Committee, described the campus as significant for architecture by Thomas J. Welsh and for its association with Catholic institutions and civil rights activism. Ferguson said staff refined the list of character-defining features and proposed removing two items from the draft: an exterior connector (a bridge between buildings) and interior character-defining features to allow flexibility for adaptive reuse. "The department believes the building meets the established eligibility requirements and landmark status is warranted," Ferguson said.

Multiple public speakers urged designation and sought clarity about the bridge's status. Mark Reiser, representing the Historic Preservation Fund Committee, asked why the connector had been removed from the staff recommendation and called for clearer identification of exterior features. Robert Cherney, the fund committee representative, said his group had understood the owner did not object to including the connector. Simon Yip, speaking for the property owner, said he did not believe the owner would oppose including the bridge.

Commissioners questioned staff on the evidence for the connector's date and on why interior features were omitted. Ferguson replied there was no building permit documenting the connector's construction and staff could not confirm when it was added; she also said interior features were removed after consulting the owner to allow adaptive reuse while noting that CEQA and later certificate-of-appropriateness review would address interior impacts if a project were proposed. "We are not able to factor in potential projects into a landmark designation," Ferguson said, explaining the department's approach under Article 10 of the planning code.

Commissioner discussion ranged from concerns about specificity of the draft character-defining features to support for staff's approach to retain regulatory flexibility for future projects. Commissioner Foley, who moved the amended recommendation, said his experience renovating churches led him to favor giving future sponsors flexibility while preserving key exterior fabric.

On a motion to adopt the staff-amended recommendation — striking interior features, removing the connector from the ordinance, and correcting a typo in the ordinance language — the commission voted 5–0 to forward the designation recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.

Next steps: The commission's recommendation will be transmitted to the Board of Supervisors, which will consider the designation ordinance and any modifications at a future hearing.