Building Inspection Commission backs ordinance to require all‑electric systems for major renovations with carve‑outs

The Building Inspection Commission on July 16 recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve amendments to San Francisco's building code to require buildings undergoing defined "major renovations" to be constructed or converted to all‑electric systems, with specified exceptions for physical or technical infeasibility, commercial food establishments, certain conversions, and a staged approach for affordable housing.

The commission's recommendation followed a lengthy staff presentation and more than two hours of public comment and commissioner questions. The motion to recommend the ordinance as amended passed on a 4–1 roll call vote (Vice President Ming, Commissioner Calamucci, Commissioner Chavez and Commissioner Newman voting yes; Commissioner Williams voting no). Commissioner Newman moved the recommendation; Commissioner Chavez seconded.

Why it matters: City staff and the ordinance sponsor framed the measure as a climate, public‑health and resilience policy. The Environment Department said buildings account for roughly 44 percent of the city's greenhouse gas emissions and that over 90 percent of those emissions come from natural gas. The proposed change would close a loophole that currently allows full gut rehabs or additions that replace most systems to reintroduce gas equipment instead of all‑electric systems.

Key provisions and scope: Presenters described a two‑part, testable definition of "major renovation" that requires both (1) a substantial scope of voluntary work (for example, nonstructural changes on two‑thirds or more of floors, a substantial structural alteration, or a substantial addition) and (2) replacement of major mechanical systems (complete replacement of space‑heating and water‑heating systems or replacement of roughly 80 percent of those systems). If both parts apply, the project would generally be required to install electric equipment rather than gas. The ordinance incorporates existing exceptions (physical/technical infeasibility and commercial food service) and adds limited, time‑bound exceptions for affordable housing and nonresidential‑to‑residential conversions.

Exceptions and implementation details: The commission discussed how feasibility determinations will be made. Staff said applicants must submit an all‑electric design and, if claiming infeasibility, secure a technical review from a panel of three experts (an electrical engineer, a mechanical engineer and an energy‑efficiency expert) who would jointly document the physical or technical barrier. That recommendation then would be reviewed by DBI and Environment staff. The ordinance also would require projects that receive an exception to be "electric ready" (prewired or designed so future electrification can be installed without major additional work) and to meet equivalent health, safety and fire protections.

Amendments the commission recommended: Commissioners reached a compromise and recommended three changes before the Board of Supervisors considers the ordinance. The commission asked staff to (1) extend the effective date for major renovations (commissioners discussed a January 2027 phase‑in for projects in the pipeline), (2) add an explicit exemption or clarified pathway to avoid disincentivizing voluntary seismic retrofits (including projects under the nonductile concrete retrofit program), and (3) preserve and not sunset the existing provision that allows 100 percent affordable housing projects to demonstrate that conversion to all‑electric is infeasible due to impacts on the project's ability to meet housing goals (the commission either extended that exception or asked that demonstration remain available indefinitely, depending on the project sponsor's demonstration, per the motion). The motion that passed reflects those amendments.

Concerns raised: Developers, housing advocates and affordable‑housing representatives cautioned that conversion to all‑electric can add service‑upgrade costs, require dedicating interior space for switchgear and reduce leasable area. Several speakers said such costs could make voluntary seismic retrofits or office‑to‑housing conversions financially infeasible unless exemptions, longer phase‑in dates or funding support are provided. The Environment Department and sponsor's staff said state and regional policies and incentives are evolving, and that implementing the requirement at the time of a major renovation is generally the most cost‑effective moment to electrify.

Next steps: The commission's recommendation, including the suggested amendments, will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors. Staff and the sponsor indicated they are open to amendments at the Board that address carve‑outs, timelines and implementation guidance.

Ending: The commission recorded the recommendation by roll call: Vice President Ming (yes); Commissioner Calamucci (yes); Commissioner Chavez (yes); Commissioner Newman (yes); Commissioner Williams (no). The motion carried 4–1.