Board upholds conditional-use approval for cannabis shop at 800 Taraval after hours, delivery and consumption limits

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved a conditional-use authorization for a cannabis retail use at 800 Taraval Street, but only after adding conditions that restrict hours, deliveries and on-site consumption following a long public hearing and an appeal from nearby merchants and residents.

The decision overturns the Planning Commission's original motion in part: the board voted 9-2 to adopt a modified approval after Supervisor Matt Haney Melgar moved amendments and Supervisor Hillary Ronan seconded the change. The board separately tabled the commission's original approval on a related item by an 11-0 vote.

The case drew large in-person turnout and extensive remote comment. Appellants argued the proposed dispensary would operate in a building that shares an address with the Gold Mirror restaurant and that the second-floor mezzanine described in the application was in active use rather than vacant. Many neighborhood speakers, several represented through Chinese and Taishanese interpretation, urged supervisors to expand the city's 600-foot buffer to include preschools and other child-focused uses.

"We support the legal, safe, and ethical use of cannabis. We are in no means against cannabis. We just wanna make sure it's used in a responsible manner and kept away from children," said Lefteris Leftario, who represented merchants and residents objecting to the proposal.

Planning Director Liz Waddy told the board the Planning Code allows owners to carve out surplus space from an existing business and dedicate it to a new commercial tenant, and said on-site edible consumption is permitted "as of right" if later authorized by the Department of Public Health. "The planning code does not limit a property owner's ability to carve out surplus space from an existing business, add demising walls, and dedicate the space to a new business including a cannabis retailer," Waddy said.

Appellants pressed three points: that the application mischaracterized the mezzanine as vacant; that public notice and the Planning Commission's motion did not make the community aware of potential on-site edible consumption; and that the city's 600-foot buffer (as amended by Ordinance 229-17 in 2017) deliberately excluded some child-care uses and thus left a policy gap.

In response, the project sponsor, Angel Davis, said the applicant had deep neighborhood ties and pledged to follow state and city rules, comprehensive security planning and a Good…