Planning Commission approves revised Central SoMa 'Creamery' project with 1,105 housing units

The San Francisco Planning Commission on Dec. 14 approved a revised plan for the Central SoMa Key site at 655 Fourth Street that would deliver approximately 1,105 dwelling units, ground‑floor retail, and one voluntary public open space. The commission voted 6‑1 to adopt the entitlements and a related planning code amendment, with Commissioner Imperial dissenting.

Planning department staff told commissioners the redesigned project reduces nonresidential uses and increases housing supply compared with the 2019 approval. Audrey Marloney summarized the change in scope and said the department recommended approval with conditions, including a condition to ensure bedrooms stacked under current building‑code shared‑light rules remain compliant: "The project shall comply with San Francisco Building Code sections 12.04.1 and 12.04.2 regarding the provision of natural light to habitable rooms within a dwelling unit with 2 or more bedrooms," staff read into the record.

Madison Tam, representing District 6 Supervisor Matt Dorsey, and the project team said the legislation before the commission would also allow fee waivers for Eastern Neighborhoods infrastructure and transportation sustainability fees for projects that provide enhanced foundations to protect the Transbay Joint Powers Authority's (TJPA) downtown rail extension (the "portal"). Tam described the change as supporting the TJPA portal while unlocking housing near the transit hub: "These fees would be waived for eligible projects in an amount commensurate with the net increase in cost of including the enhanced foundation and shoring systems," she said.

Developer and design teams emphasized the redesign's emphasis on residents and neighborhood connectivity, with project sponsor Henry Sears saying the changes "put a focus on the residents of the building and the neighborhood around it" and the design team describing a prominent corner plaza and widened sidewalks.

The commission’s discussion covered transportation impacts, the absence of on‑site inclusionary units (the project is eligible to pay an in‑lieu inclusionary fee under pipeline rules), e‑bike charging and storage, and protections for nested bedrooms. Commissioner Braun noted the project's potential to generate in‑lieu funds that could support deeper affordability, while Commissioner Imperial voiced concerns about reduced impact fees and public infrastructure funding.

The motion to approve included staff modifications and the added shared‑light review, and passed 6‑1. The Planning Department will enforce conditions of approval, and the project sponsor must address Department of Building Inspection plan revisions and planning staff review before permits are finalized.